
teH A ^ ' 


2 cr 


Bnnk , iio 




G^Pglitl^ 



CQBKIGHT OEPOSm 



Research Publications o/ me University of Minnesota 



Studies in t\xc Social Sciences 
Number 10 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 

CRITICALLY EDITED 

AND 

AN INTRODUCTION DEALING WITH PARLIAMENTARY SOURCES 

FOR THE EARLY STUARTS 



EDITED BY 

WALLACE NOTESTEIN, PLD. 

Professor of History in the University of Minnesota 
AND 

FRANCES HELEN RELF, Pk.D. 

Professor of History in Lake Erie College 



t 




Price: $4.00 



Puhliihed by the University of Minnesota 
Minnea^oJit, June. 1921 



f } 



RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS 
OF THE 

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 

These publications contain the results of research work from various depart- 
ments of the University and are offered for exchange with universities, scientific 
societies, and other institutions. Papers will be published as separate monographs 
numbered in several series. There is no stated interval of publication. Application 
for any of these publications should be made to the University Librarian. 

BIBLIOGR.\PHICAL SERIES 
1- James Thayer Gerout.u, Sources of English History of the Seventeenth 
Century, 1603-1689, in the University of Minnesota Library, with a Selection of 
Secondary Material. 1921. $4.00. 

STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES 

1. Thompson and Warber, Social and Economic Survey of a Rural Township 
in Southern Minnesota. 1913. $0.50. 

2. Matthias Nordberg Orfield, Federal Land Grants to the States, with 
Special Reference to Minnesota. 1915. $1.00. 

3. Edward Van Dyke Robinson, Early Economic Conditions and the Develop- 
ment of Agriculture in Minnesota. 1915. $1,50. 

4. L. D. H. Weld and Others, Studies in the Marketing of Farm Products. 
1915. $0.50. 

5. Ben Palmer, Swamp Land Drainage, with Special Reference to Minnesota. 
1915. $0.50. 

6. Albert Ernest Jenks, Indian-White Amalgamation: An Anthropometric 
Study. 1916. $0.50. 

7. C. D. Allin, A History of the Tariff Relations of the Australian Colonies. 
1918. $0.75. 

8. Frances H. Relf, The Petition of Right. 1917. $0.75. 

9. Gilbert L. Wilson, Agriculture of the Hidatsa Indians: An Indian Inter- 
pretation. 1917. $0.75. 

10. Notestein and Relf, Editors, Commons Debates for 1629 Critically Edited 
and an Introduction ' Dealing with Parliamentary Sources for the Early Stuarts. 
1921. $4.00. 

11. Raymond A. Kent, A Study of State Aid to Public Schools in Minnesota, 
1918. $1.00. 

12. Rupert C. Lodge, The Meaning and Function of Simple Modes in the 
Philosophy of John Locke. 1918. $0.75. 

13. Florence R. Curtis, The Libraries of the American State and National 
Institutions for Defectives, Dependents, and Delinquents. 1918. $0.50. 

14. Louis A. Boettiger, Armenian Legends and Festivals. 1920. $0.75. 

15. William Anderson, A History of the Constitution of Minnesota, with the 
First Verified Text. 1921. $1.75. 

STUDIES IN THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES AND MATHEMATICS 

1. Frankforter and Frary, Equilibria in Systems Containing Alcohols, Salts, 
and Water. 1912. $0.50. 

2. Frankforter and Kritchevsky, A New Phase of Catalysis. 1914. $0.50. 

(Continued inside back cover) 



/ 



Researcn Publications of the University of Minnesota 

Studies m tne Social Sciences ^ 

^ Number 10 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 

CRITICALLY EDITED 

AND 

AN INTRODUCTION DEALING WITH PARLIAMENTARY SOURCES 
FOR THE EARLY STUARTS 



EDITED BY 

WALLACE NOTESTEIN, Pk.D. 

Professor of History in the University of Minnesota 
AND 

FRANCES HELEN RELF, Ph.D. 

Professor of History in Lake Erie College 




Puhlishtd hy the University of J^innesota 
Minnea^^oJis. June, 1921 



If^ 



^'L'o 



\\(* 



Copyright 1921 

BY THE 

University of Minnesota 



0)C!.A627156 



OCl 



7 \92\ 



WILLIAM HAKEVfiLL, 

m TfelS J^ATTJEIK AGE- 



PREFACE 

Scholars of seventeenth century English history know how much need 
there is for a new parliamentary history. The Dean of those scholars, 
Professor C. H. Firth, has in writing and conversation repeatedly urged 
this need. So much new material has been brought to light since the pub- 
lication of the old Parliamentary History that the student is forced to go 
himself to the depositories of manuscripts for what he needs ; he can hardly 
suppress a sigh for the good old times when the writer of history was satis- 
fied to turn to this many volumed publication confident that it contained 
all there was to be known. It is not now as it hath been of yore. Where- 
ever one turns in parliamentary history, one has to consult unpublished 
material and much of it. There is not a parliament between James I and 
the Long Parliament, save that perhaps of 1614, where the material is 
all in print. Nothing is more necessary than to edit the parliamentary 
diaries that have come to light. 

For one short session we have tried to meet that need. We have tried 
to collect into one place all the yet unprinted material bearing directly on 
the proceedings of the House of Commons. Moreover we have sought 
to show where all the material now in print is to be found and its 
exact relation to what is here presented. Further we have sought 
to make it possible for the reader to get the full narrative at one reading, 
by adding to that account which seemed fullest complete cross-references 
to the other narratives. It will be recalled by students that the old Par- 
liamentary History threw all the different narratives together. Obviously 
that could not now be done. Each narrative had to be presented by itself. 
But by taking the most nearly complete narrative as a basis and giving 
in full the references for what is additional in the others, we hope to 
have gained for the reader the advantage of having conveniently at hand 
the whole story. 

In the Introduction we have sought to treat fully the character of the 
sources for 1629 — the Commons Journals, the True Relation, and the private 
diaries and letters. The Commons Journals proved a puzzle, a very mys- 
terious puzzle. Here was no official record, very far from it. What was 
it, then? It proved to be the first-hand jottings of the clerk, preliminary 
to making up the finished Journal. Was there ever a finislied Journal? 
What became of it? Is any of it still in existence, and if so where? There 
was the problem also of the True Relation. Is it perhaps connected in some 
way with the Commons Journals? So we thought for a while, but it was a 
poor guess. What is it then? It is a combination of news-letters with what 
we have ventured to call "separates." The private diaries and letters pre- 
sented no problems. These are indeed the only sources about which there is 



vi PREFACE 

little to say. They deserve rescue from archival obscurity. They must 
be advanced to the first place among these sources. 

If the discussion growing out of the True Relation prove somewhat 
technical and lengthy, the excuse must be that it serves to explain a kind 
of parliamentary material that so far has been taken for granted and has 
been more used than scrutinized. We found that we could not satisfy 
ourselves until we had answered the baffling questions as to the True Rela- 
tion. We broke it up into its component parts. We found that those 
parts, separates and news-letters, were characteristic of parliaments before 
and after 1629, and we were led on to the wider question of their origin 
as general forms of parliamentary accounts. We came upon the men who 
made them, scriveners around Westminster, precisely the irresponsible 
pickers-up of ill-considered trifles who were later to gather the news for 
the first newspapers. We were forced to believe that the first newspapers 
derive almost as much from these news-letters as from the corantoes to 
which they are commonly traced. 

It might be expected that the Introduction should contain a discussion 
of the session of 1629, or at least a careful chronological narrative of it 
based upon the sources published. We believe that those sources tell 
their own story, and, that, where they do not, the footnotes will enable the 
reader to piece it together. 

The narrative history of the Stuart period has been worked out by a 
great historian with extraordinary accuracy. To tell the story of 1629 
more fully and more accurately in the light of such new information as 
may have been gained could only be worth while if the story were told 
in relation to what had gone before, if the constitutional background of 
the struggle in 1629 were elaborately explained. This can be done only 
when similarly complete materials for earlier parliaments are available. 
We have already gathered all the known materials for 1628, transliterated 
them, and partially annotated them. We are doing the same thing 
for the Parliament of 1626. For the first few months of the later 
but most significant Long Parliament an edition of D'Ewes' great diary, 
annotated from all the other diaries, is completed and will be published 
within a year. But, when these are done, much remains to be done. There 
are two accounts of the Commons debates for 1620-21 that have never been 
used, one exceedingly full; there is another account for 1604-07 that has 
never been made use of by historians. Not one third of the note-books 
for the Long Parliament have ever been printed, few of them have been 
used save by the great Gardiner, and he only tells his plain imvamished 
tale of what came next. 

When all the diaries, note-books and "parliamentary compilations" 
have been critically edited — although of course new ones will continue to 
turn up — the way will have been prepared for a new study of parliament 



PREFACE vii 

and of the constitutional significance of the period. Were all materials, how- 
ever, accessible that study could not be carried on by itself. The Stuart 
period must be re-examined in the light of earlier English history, particu- 
larly in the light of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The many 
precedents of which Coke, Cotton, and the pariiamentary lawyers and anti- 
quarians made elaborate use must be looked up and evaluated. How far 
were those .men right in their struggle with the King? Were they reclaim- 
ing groimd that had been lost or pushing forward to new ground? Was 
the Lancastrian period that glorious epoch of parliamentary rule that we 
have supposed? Had the Constitution been won by 1485? We suspect 
that such a study will prove that Coke, Eliot and Digges, Pym, St. John, 
Whitelocke and the rest were really driving parliament forward to new 
positions, that they were overvaluing much of Lancastrian precedent, 
honestly enough no doubt. ^ Such subjects as tonnage and poundage, 
as impositions, as habeas corpus, as the privileges of parliament, need to 
be studied comprehensively in all the parliamentary materials of the 
seventeenth century and in the earlier periods as well. The whole matter 
of the growth of parliamentary method and procedure is almost untouched 
as yet and is a fascinating and profitable subject. The slow accretions of 
parliamentary common law about procedure, the manuals and digests, 
most of them still unprinted and almost unused, that mark the stages of 
progress, will bear the closest study. 

It woidd be futile therefore at this point to discuss the constitutional 
significance of 1629. 

What we hope is that the sources here presented, with the critical appa- 
ratus attached, will make it easier for all students of the history of the con- 
stitutional problems of the time to approach these general topics that 
must be dealt with. We hope that in the next few years many such par- 
liamentary diaries will be edited in this country and in England. When 
this is done the preparations will have been made for a new general 
advance. It has often been said that the "gleaning after Gardiner" 
is very poor. The statement has unfortunately kept students away from 
prospecting ground that still has much pay ore. There is much to be done, 
many questions to be answered. But the first thing to do is to find and 
edit the sources. Many scholars must help in that work. 

We wish to thank many librarians and owners of manuscripts who have 
helped us. Our debt is of course greatest to the authorities of the British 
Museum and those of the Record Office. American students can never 
be too grateful for the kindness with which they are treated in those great 
repositories. Mr. Worthington Ford of the Massachusetts Historical 

^ These ideas have been thrown out by the first editor in his introduction to the source problem on 
Free Speech in White and Notestein, Source Problems in English History (New York, 1915), and in The 
Stuart Period, Unsolved Problems, Ann. Kept. Am. Hist. Assoc. 1916. 1:391-99. 



viii PREFACE 

Society sent us the manuscript of the Commons Debates for 1628 in the 
collections of that society. Mr. Gerould, librarian of the University of 
Minnesota, has aided us in a score of ways. We are under great obliga- 
tions to Mr. Pickering, librarian of the Inner Temple, who not only made 
available the facilities of the parliamentary collections there, but went 
out of his way to examine for us the manuscripts of the Duke of Bedford. 
The librarian of Trinity College, DubHn, took much pains about the Gros- 
venor Manuscripts and wrote us the information upon which we deter- 
mined to photograph that manuscript. We have also to thank him for 
permission to print Grosvenor. Nor can we forget the courtesy of the 
librarian of Lambeth Palace. For permission to use their manuscripts we 
desire to thank the Duke of Northumberland, the Duke of Manchester, 
the Duke of Bedford, the Marquis of Bute, Lord Downshire, Lord Whame- 
cliffe, Lord de L'Isle and Dudley, and J. H. Gumey, J. P., of Keswick 
Hall, Norfolk. 

We are indebted to Miss Etheleen Kemp, sometime scholar in History 
at the University of Minnesota, who started upon this work with us and who, 
upon a research appropriation from the University of Minnesota, did in 
painstaking fashion most of the work of classification of the manuscripts 
of the True Relation. The classification here adopted is in large part hers, 
although she cannot be held in any way accountable for the theories de- 
veloped from that classification and from further research since. 

It is often possible for joint editors to define the limits of the work of 
each. In this case it is impossible to do so. Miss Relf has perhaps done 
the larger part of the True Relation, Mr. Notestein possibly has taken 
the greater share of the writing. But the plan, the text, the conclusions, 
even the footnotes have been done in cooperation and each editor shares 
the responsibility for every part. 

W. N. 

F. H. R. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

May, 1920 



CONTENTS 

Dedication iii 

Preface v-viii 

Introduction xi-lxvii 

Chapter I. Commons Journals xi-xiv 

Chapter II. The True Relation xv-xix 

Chapter III. Separates xx-xli 

Chapter IV'. News-Letters xlii-lv 

Chapter V. Parliamentary Compilations Ivi-lx 

Chapter VI. Private Diaries Ixi-lxv 

Chapter VII. The Account of March Second Ixvi-lxvii 

True Relation 1-106 

Nicholas's Notes 107-72 

Grosvenor's Diary 173-244 

Nethersole's Letters 245-51 

March Second Account 252-67 

Appendix 271-92 

Copies of Separates 271-72 

Copies of the True Relation 273 

Classification of the copies of the True Relation 274-75 

Table showing extent to which the copies of the True Relation 

have been collated 276 

Outline showing variations in order and omissions in the copies 

of the True Relation 277-92 

Index 295-304 









/A^ iOm^' 



^y/rA 



I {tirS.H^'u/k 



mmmmm 



Commons Journals for part of February 5 
Facsimile of rotograph of original manuscript 



INTRODUCTION 

A DISCUSSION OF THE SOURCES FOR 1629 AND OF SOME GENERAL 
PROBLEMS OF PARLIAMENTARY MATERIALS FOR THE EARLY 
STUART PERIOD. 

CHAPTER I 
COMMONS JOURNALSi 

The Commons Journals for 1603-29, when they were examined in the 
printed version, raised many problems. One of the first things noted was 
their incompleteness. The whole record is missing sometimes for a day, 
sometimes for a week, sometimes even for a longer period. It appears 
further that important documents are left out of the records, resolutions, 
messages, reports of committees, letters from the King, all documents 
that one would naturally expect to find in the official record. More than 
that they are the very documents which the printed journals show the 
Commons had ordered the clerk to "enter as of record." Every session 
of parliament from 1604 to 1629 furnishes examples of such omissions. 
What proves still more interesting is that in the Commons debates for 1628 
a member stated that "a copy of a given resolution was entered in the 
Clerks Book and signed by the Sub-committee." But this document 
which a member had seen in the Clerk's Book of seven years earHer is 
not to be found in the printed Journals. Sometimes an order is to be found 
in the Journals, but it is not in the wording, the official finished wording, 
which we know from other sources, was finally adopted by the Commons. 
Furthermore we find that for one session of the Commons, that of 1624, 
there are two texts of the Journals, apparently of equal authority and yet 
differing all through in wording. Again for the sessions of 1604-07 there 
are two Journals, but this time of quite a different character. 

For a solution of these problems we turned to the original manuscripts 
of the Journals carefully preserved in the library of the House of Commons. 
Turning first to that for 1629 we found that it was not written in the cler- 
ical hand of the time, a hand at once distinguishable and always to be met 
with in the final draft of an official record. Not only was it in the hurried 
scrawl of a man taking notes as fast as he could, but it showed clearly that 
it was a record taken by two different men. The greater part is by one, 
but the other frequently began or ended the day for him, and sometimes 
even made the whole day's record. These hurriedly scrawled notes give 
one an entirely different impression of the record from the neatly printed 

^ We have put no foot notes to this discussion of the Commons Journals because their number would be 
legion, and the subject is one that can only be sketched here. A long and, we hope, comprehensive treat- 
ment of the Commons Journals for the early Stuarts, giving the evidence for the conclusions indicated here, 
will shortly be forthcoming in another publication. 



xii INTRODUCTION 

page. Fragmentary notes they are, sometimes incomplete as to sentences, 
with phrases unfinished and sentences breaking off in the middle; words 
and phrases are run through with a pen and new words put in at the end 
of the erasiire. What is more significant, the text has often been amended 
within the line so as to make the statement more definite and exact. 

This practice may well be illustrated. On February 10, the House enu- 
merated under six heads the plan of work. As first written the third head 
read: "A Select Committee to be named to examine the matter." In the 
space following this was changed to read: "A Select Committee to be named 
to examine the matter and the information in the Star Chamber." An 
even better illustration of the clerk's efforts to make corrections is to be 
found in the several forms of the order for debate on the legality of an 
election. This passage in the manuscript Journal we have reproduced as 
a frontispiece; it is taken from the account for February 5, being the lower 
part of folio 22. It is, however, so hard to decipher from the reduced 
reproduction, that it seems advisable to give here the steps by which the 
clerk arrived at his final statement. He began: "The election of Mr. Long 
being sheriffe of Wiltes"; then ran his pen through the words and wrote: 
"Upon question the election of Mr. Long," ran his pen through "the elec- 
tion of Mr. Long" and continued: "The matter concerning the election 
of Mr. Long beinge Sheriffe of Wiltes and his being sent for by a pursevant 
to answer a pl[ain]t in the Star Chamber for his sitting here last Session 
and being no further proceeding a[gai]nst him there to be debated here." 
He crossed all this out and began again: "The question whether Mr. Long 
sheriffe of Wiltes elected a burgess in another county to be debated here." 
This he proceeded to alter and add to until it read: "The question whether 
the election of a sheriffe of a county being a burgess in another county 
be good and whether he may during his shrivalty come out of his county 
without his Majesties special leave and serve here to be debated here in 
the House." This too was rejected. Then the clerk wrote what appears 
in the printed Journal: "Upon question the LegaHty of Mr. Longs Election 
and serving here the last session being then Sheriffe of Wiltes and elected 
a Citizen for [blank] to be debated here in the House upon Monday next." 

Not all the changes, of course, were caused by the efforts of the clerk to 
be progressively more exact. Other corrections are to be found which must 
have been made by him in consequence of actual changes made in the 
program of the House. On January 28 there is an order for a committee 
which read at first: "To meete tomorrow in the committee chamber." 
This was altered to read: "To go presently about it in the Treasury Cham- 
ber in the Exchequer. None there to trouble them." A more important 
change occurs in the record for February 23. There the order for adjoiun- 
ment read at first: "The House thereupon adjoumeth itself till Wednesday 



INTRODUCTION xiii 

next." This was changed to read: "The House to be adjourned till Wed- 
nesday next." Here was a significant change. The privilege of adjourn- 
ing themselves was one for which the Commons were striving, as the debates 
on March 2 show. With deepest intention the clerk had been prompted 
to change the form of the statement. 

The manuscript Journals for the whole period, that is from the first 
parliament in the reign of James, are in general of the same character as 
that for 1629 just described. They have the same appearance of jottings 
taken during the session rather than of finished notes. Such changes put 
into the text at a later time might show that the Commons had been cor- 
recting their official minutes; put in as the clerk was writing, they point 
to the conclusion that he was making notes while the Commons were 
debating. If they do not suffice to establish such a theory they at least 
point in that direction. 

There is further evidence which confirms the theory. It appears that 
the Commons had not one journal as has been generally supposed, but two. 
The members refer to the "Book of Notes" and the "Clerk's Book." Between 
the two they distinguish clearly. It was in the Clerk's Book that in 1628 
the resolution was entered that we failed to find in the printed Journal. 
What is more important for our purpose, we find the Commons referring 
to the Book of Notes for certain wordings which are to be found in what 
we today call the Commons Journals. 

This distinction between the "Book of Notes" and the "Clerk's Book" 
is upheld by Simonds D'Ewes in 1631 when he was getting together 
the records of all the parliaments of Queen Elizabeth's reign. He speaks 
of the "first original draught of the Journals of the House of Commons 
taken by Fulk Onslow, Esq. Clerk of the same" and of the "fair tran- 
scribed copy of the said Journal by the said Mr. Onslow's direction then 
abstractedly and summarily taken." D'Ewes, who knew as much about 
parliamentary records as anybody in his century, recognized, then, a clear 
distinction between the "Book of Notes," or the jottings made at the time, 
and the "Clerk's Book," or the finished, perfected Journal. 

The same distinction was made by Harding, Clerk of the Commons 
in 1742. When the Commons called upon him for a report of the manu- 
scripts in his possession, he described the books for this period, 1603-29, 
then in his possession, as "being for the most part minutes taken by the 
clerk and not afterwards transcribed." Later in the same century, Hatsell, 
Clerk of the Commons, implies the same fact. "It is the Clerk's office," 
he wrote, "to see that the Journal of that session is properly made and 
fairly transcribed from the Minute Books, the printed votes and original 
papers that have been laid before the House." It will be noticed that 
Hatsell thinks of the Journal as a compilation from the Minute Books 
and other documents. 



xiv INTRODUCTION 

We cannot halt here to give further evidence to support the opinion 
that there were two different books, the "Book of Notes," or "Minute 
Book," which we may dub the Jottings, and the "Clerk's Book," 
which we may call the official record, and which is just that. Many kinds 
of evidence could be adduced. The arguments for this conclusion will be 
set forth at much greater length in a separate paper. But it must be 
added at this point that for two sessions of parliament between 1604 and 
1629 we have parts of the completed journal. In the printed Journals 
for 1604-07 there are two versions of the Journals for those years. One is 
obviously jottings and in the manuscript has all the characteristics already 
noted of jottings, the other is a completed journal with resolutions in final 
form and in the manuscript is in the round official hand of a transcribed 
and finished journal. For one session, then, we have both editions of the 
Journal, the Clerk's Book, and the Book of Notes. And the same thing is 
partly true for the session of 1610. In the British Museum are to be found 
extracts from the finished Book for 1610, extracts that differ in form and 
wording from the text printed in the Commons Journals and that are very 
clearly taken from another record, from a much more finished record. 

Whether the finished record was ever made for all the sessions must 
remain a matter of doubt. We can say with considerable assurance that 
it was made for the Parliament of 1620-21. And we must suspect that it 
was made for other sessions. If we ask what became of the finished record, 
why has it been lost, we can offer only surmises. We know that it must 
have been lost before the Restoration; we know that in his studies aU 
William Prynne had to use was what we have today; we are led to suspect 
that several of the finished journals were lost, some through the carelessness 
of clerks, who loaned them out to their friends, others through the usage 
of clerks who kept the Journals as their private property which went 
to their heirs. The character of the Journals as a record of the Commons 
for their own use was slow in establishing itself. We may suspect that the 
first two Stuart kings were none too anxious to have the records of the 
Commons saved, and got hold of and possibly made way with the official 
records. And, further, if the records had not been destroyed in this way, it 
is probable that the troubles of the Civil Wars would account for their loss. 

In any case what concerns us is that the record which we have for 1629 
is not a finished or official record of the proceedings of the House of Com- 
mons, is not the record which the Committee on Privileges certified and 
legitimated, but merely the jottings, careless, hurried jottings. Those 
jottings really deserve no more credit than the records of other reporters 
of what occurred in the Commons. Nicholas, who was no doubt making 
his report for the King, Grosvenor who took down the words almost sten- 
ographically, are quite as much to be trusted as the Clerk of the Commons. 



CHAPTER II 
THE TRUE RELATION 

Any one familiar with the source material for parliamentary debates 
in 1629 may well ask why, in a collection of manuscripts heretofore inac- 
cessible, we have included the True Relation. It is a source that has 
been used by every historian, contemporary or modem, who has written 
upon this session of parliament. It was the one account easily procurable. 
As early as 1641 it was in print. Other editions came out in 1654 and 1707. 
In 1751 it was reprinted in the old Parliamentary History. Besides 
these complete editions, Rushworth embodied much of it in his Collections 
published in 1680. Then why print it again? The answer is that there 
proved to be so many variations in the printed editions that we felt it 
necessary to establish a standard text. This involved a comparison of 
the printed copies with manuscript versions, some forty-eight of which 
were turned up.^ We found that these manuscript copies differed not 
only from any one of the printed editions but also from one another. 
It became evident that this account of the debates of 1629 had been 
copied time and time again and had suffered many changes in the process; 
that these changes had become a part of the text before the first printed 
edition appeared. Yet the first three printed editions were made from 
single manuscripts; there was no attempt at collation. In the old Par- 
liamentary History there was such an attempt; the text in that work 
was based upon the edition of 1707 supplemented by materials in two 
manuscripts very similar to the text of the 1641 edition. But since 1751, 
much more valuable copies in manuscript have been found, for example, 
that one on which Gardiner placed his main reliance for the history of 1629. 
Instead of abandoning the older editions for the new discovery, as Gardiner 
did, we have sought to do much more fully what the editor of the old 
Parliamentary History did. By a careful collation of the many versions, 
both in print and in manuscript, we would present a version not only 
free from copyists' errors but much fuller than that found in any single copy. 

Such a version of the True Relation should do more even than an inde- 
pendent account, of the type to be found in the private diary, to correct 
the mistakes of historians who depended so largely upon a single copy 
of the True Relation for their narratives of this session of parliament. 
For that reason alone we feel that the collation was worth while. But 
that was not the only object in view. The work was carried on largely in the 

> See Appendix for a full list of copies classified to show where they are to be found. 
A search through private collections would undoubtedly bring to light many more copies. Enough 
have been found to indicate that numerous copies were made at the time which came into the possession 
of private individuals. 



xvi INTRODUCTION 

effort to determine the character of this account and if possible its author- 
ship. No authorship is assigned and no explanation is vouchsafed either 
in the printed accounts or in the several manuscript versions, as to where 
the material came from. A casual examination indicates that it is hardly 
the personal diary of a member of the Commons but rather a more formal 
narrative of proceedings and debates, comparable even to the Commons 
Journals. Yet the differences are so great that it cannot be put down as 
an official source. Then, how was this material gathered? On the answer 
to this question depends much of the value of this undoubtedly contem- 
porary account. 

In the attempt to solve this problem we are not pioneers. John Bruce, 
whose name in seventeenth-century English history must never be forgotten, 
came to certain conclusions based upon a' comparison of sixteen copies of 
the True Relation} His conclusion was that all the copies were derived 
from a common original which "was probably compiled from time to time, 
perhaps even as the title may indicate, from day to day, during the sitting 
of the parHament, by some person who had access to pecuHar sources of 
information, although without being directly authorized as a reporter."' 

We began the solution of this problem, as Bruce had begun, by dividing 
the manuscripts into groups.* But our basis for classification had to be 
very different. To use the form of title as a basis, as he had done, we soon 
found, would never do at all.^ To follow, as he had done, certain verbal 
differences, most of them copyists' errors, was equally futile. And the 
reason was this: there are many more outstanding differences, either in 
the presence or absence of whole speeches or reports of committees, or in 
the debate for particular days. It was only by fixing upon these that a 
rational classification could be arrived at. This classification by the 
presence or absence of certain documents became necessary as soon as it 
became clear that the True Relation did not come (as Bruce had supposed) 
from one original, but that it was a compilation made from materials 
derived from different sources and put together by different persons. 
It is due to compilers rather than to copyists that the groups of manu- 
scripts differ as widely as they do. By classifying on the basis of the 
insertion or omission of documents we found that the manuscripts fell into 

2 Nine in the British Museum (Harg. 299; Harl. 2234, 2305. 4295, 4619. 4702. 6056, 6255, and 6800). 
two in the Public Record OfiBce (vol. 132, no. 45 and no. 46), two printed copies (those printed 1641 and 
1654), and three private manuscripts, one owned by Lord Verulam (now in the British Museum Add. 
32473), one in Bruce's possession, and one in the Library of the Society of Antiquaries of London. 

^ Archaeologia 38:237-45. 

* Bruce's classification. 

1. 2234, 4619, 4702, 6056, D. O., 6255, 45, 46, E.P. 

2. 4295 and his own MS. 

3. 299, 2305, 6800, Verulam. 

^ Bruce followed this method only to the extent of noting which manuscripts contained the "Heads 
of Articles to be insisted upon concerning Religion," given at the end of February 23. But on the other 
hand he put together in his first group copies which have totally dififerent material for February 4-7. 



INTRODUCTION xvii 

four groups. These we have designated as X, ^, r, and $.® An examination 
of the order of documents given in the appendix will show how marked the 
differences between the groups are. The <S> group is set off completely 
from the others by its account of the days February 3 to 7, as also by its 
omission of Rouse's speech on January 26 and Pym's on the following day. 
This is the most distinct group, the one that gives the key to the solution 
of the problem. 

It was the character of this group that led us first to reject Bruce's con- 
clusion that aU the copies came from a common original, and to take up the 
hypothesis, since adopted, that the True Relation is a compilation made 
up from materials derived from different sources and put together by differ- 
ent persons. This theory is not alone one which explains the differences, 
but it is borne out by much evidence. In presenting the evidence upon which 
the theory is based, it becomes necessary first of all to distinguish between 
the two kinds of material which make up the True Relation. These are 
both illustrated by the main differences marking off the «l> group, which have 
already been pointed out. One kind of material is to be found in the account 
of the days February 3-7, an account which consists of brief narratives 
of the speeches, motions, and orders, and which we have denominated 
news-letters. The other kind of material consists of speeches reported at 
length, as those of Rouse and Pym. This type of material we have called 
separates because both as manuscripts and printed copies they are to be 
found outside the True Relation as isolated units. They are indeed to be 
found both singly and in collections of several grouped together in one 
volume. The theory that the True Relation is a compilation is based upon 
evidence that there was more than one series of news-letters used and that 
the separates were never an integral part of any daily letter but were added 
by the compiler. 

The clearest evidence of two sets of news-letters is to be found in the 
two accounts for February 3-7, but that is not the only evidence. For 
February 14-23 we again find two sets of news-letters, quite distinct, though 
less easily marked off. Here the distinction did not become apparent 
until we had happened upon a manuscript bound in Petyt 538:18. In 
this voliune is a manuscript entitled "The Continuation from the 14th 
till the 23rd Februarie 1628." A comparison of this manuscript with full 
editions of the True Relation shows that it is far from complete, that many 
of its days are incorrectly placed, and that in spite of its title it gives nothing 
of what took place on February 20 and 21. But what is important for 
our purposes is that nothing in its whole accoimt is to be fotmd in any 

® See Appendix for a full list of the copies classified according to this grouping. 



xviii INTRODUCTION 

copy of the $ group; in other words group $ and the Continuation furnish 
between them two distinct sets of news-letters for February 14-23.^ 

The evidence already presented suggests that these two distinct sets 
of news-letters came out in parts. Further evidence makes it seem prob- 
able that one, if not both of them, was a daily. This evidence is found in 
the use made of the material of the Continuation by the three groups 
X, ^, and r. Only the X group used it all. The X group used that for the 
14th, 16th, and 17th; the T group only that under the last date. This 
account used by the T group for the 23rd is also found by itself in a book 
of separates, which goes far to confirm the idea that this account came 
out daily. The two sets of news-letters not only came out in parts, prob- 
ably daily, but it is also likely that each was incomplete, necessitating 
the use of both by the ambitious compiler who wished to make his account 
as full as possible. Different compilers combined the news-letters differ- 
ently; hence the variations in the several versions of the True Relation. 

The second explanation of the variations is found in the insertion of 
separate speeches by the compilers. That they were inserted and were 
never an integral part of the proceedings there is ample evidence. 
In a manuscript edition of the True Relation to be found in the Petyt 
Collection (538:9) the evidence of insertion stands out in the clearest 
form. The separates are given by themselves and then in the same hand- 
writing follows: "A True Relation" which contains only news-letters. 

' The distinction in news-letters seems to hinge upon group *. For both February 3-7 and 14-23 that 
group embodies series different from those to be found elsewhere. Were the series for the two different 
dates in this group a common series? That is impossible to prove and yet it seems probable. They have 
certain characteristics in common; both are fairly complete as to motions, resolution, etc., both record nearly 
all the speeches but record them in briefest form. When we examine the other series of news-letters for 
February 3-7, that found in groups X, ^, and r, with the series found in the Continuation for February 
14-23, we find such similarity as to lead to the conclusion that they also were part of a single series. There 
are few speeches but they are given at greater length than in the * series. There is also an interesting 
similarity in title. Many of the manuscripts of the * group have retained just before Kirton's speech on 
February 3 this heading: "The continuance of the journal." It would be hazardous to premise much on 
the use of "continuance" for February 3-7 and "continuation" for February 14-23, but when the two series 
are otherwise similar and are differentiated from the other series, the words do seem significant. 

For the rest of the session, that is for the periods January 20 through February 2, and February 9-13, 
there is no reason for thinking that more than one news-letter was used. The differences there are from 
omissions rather than variation. Were these news-letters like those of the * group or like the Continuation? 
There is no positive proof, but the weight of evidence inclines towards the conclusion that it was the Contin- 
uation. We are again helped by a manuscript from the Petyt collection (538:9). This copy of the True 
Relation is complete through February 7 but then jumps directly to February 23. Its proceedings for Feb- 
ruary 3-7 as well as for the 23 puts it clearly in the Continuation groups, that is the X, *, and T. For 
the period preceding February 3 it has the same faulty dating as the Continuation; the material it gives is 
of the same character. There is proof too that it came out in fragments. These fragments are found in 
the Harleian collection number 2217. On folio 84 of that volume under the heading "Sir John Eliot, his 
Speech at the Committee 30 of January 1628" are given two speeches made by Eliot on February 2. 
This date as well as the speeches themselves agrees with the Petyt manuscript. On folios 85-87 are given 
the speeches by Seymour and Kirton for January 26 and Earle and Coryton for the following day, all just 
as given in the same Petyt manuscript. Further proof that this account came out in fragments is to be 
found in the old worn copy of the True Relation, Lansdowne 491. That is numbered by each four pages as 
though it had come out in quartos. The handwriting changes between one and two, between two and 
three. Each quarto shows signs of having been folded, suggesting that it had been sent out separately and 
later bound. 



INTRODUCTION xix 

This would seem to indicate that the title was at first applied only to the 
news-letters, and that only at a later date was it applied to the compilation 
of letters and separates. The Northumberland manuscript probably 
marks the transition, for its title reads: "A True Relation of eVerie dales 
passage in Parliament together with the Long Speeches." If further proof 
is needed, it is to be found in a British Museum manuscript catalogued 
Lansdowne 491. Here two of the separates are in an entirely different 
handwriting. If one may judge from the grime on their backs they had been 
carried 'around for some time before they were bound in with the rest of 
the account. 

The methods used in inserting the separates mark out clearly the 
different compilers. A characteristic of the <^ group is the few separates 
it contains. That the compiler knew of the speeches there is no doubt, 
for on two occasions instead of the separate we find "See his speech at 
large." Other compilers have added the separate without omitting the 
shorter account of the same speech to be found in the news-letter, 
thereby showing their ignorance of what went on in the House of Commons. 
These compilers had even more difficulty when there was nothing in the 
news-letters to indicate where the separate should be inserted; then the 
separates, which were often incorrectly dated, were put into the compi- 
lation in the most haphazard way. The presence or absence of the sepa- 
rates, and even more the order in which they appear, mark off the versions 
of the True Relation one from another. 

By the evidence so far presented we have sought to disprove one part of 
Bruce's conclusion, that all the copies of the True Relation are derived from 
a common original ; to prove rather that it is made up of at least two sets of 
news-letters which were issued serially, probably from day to day, and of 
speeches originally issued as separates; and that these were combined by 
different compilers who were ignorant of the actual occiurences. 

One way of eradicating the faults of the compilers is to reduce the 
compilation to its original parts. This we have done with the accounts 
for March second, where seven different combinations have been reduced 
to the three original accounts. It would not be possible to do this with 
the whole of the True Relation, nor was it necessary in order to correct 
the mistakes of the compilers. Those, as well as the mistakes of the copy- 
ists, we hope, have been corrected by the comparison of the many manu- 
scripts with each other and with independent accounts. The important 
thing is to realise that the True Relation is made up of news-letters and 
separates. To appraise the True Relation, we must determine the value 
of its parts. A True Relation was something unique in the third parliament 
of Charles I. Separates and news-letters were not; they are found in 
earlier and later parliaments. Their value as source material is dealt with 
in other chapters of this Introduction. 



CHAPTER III 
vSEPARATES 

We have dealt at length with the perplexities of the True Relation. 
That interesting but mysterious narrative of the Commons session of 1629 
turns out to be not the account of a private member, nor indeed a single 
account at all, but a hodge-podge of parliamentary materials. Two kinds 
of manuscripts were lumped together, manuscript speeches and documents, 
which we have termed "separates," and manuscript narratives of what 
went on, narratives prepared for distribution at regular intervals, which 
we may call parliamentary news-letters, and which were just like the other 
news-letters of the time save that they were concerned only with events 
at Westminster. It is easy enough to resolve the True Relation into its 
parts, to say that it is a combination of two kinds of source materials. 
But what were these parts? Where did they come from? We must raise 
many questions that concern not only the Parliament of 1629 but all the 
parliaments from the early Elizabethan to the end of the Long Parliament. 
Especially is this true of the separates which had an earlier origin than the 
news-letter. What were separates? Where did they come from? How 
were they prepared? These are questions that must be answered, not 
only for an understanding of the sources here printed, but for an under- 
standing of the whole subject of parHamentary material for this period. 
In beginning a discussion of the subject of separates it may be well 
to define the term once more. By a separate we mean a parliamentary 
document or speech to be found in a single manuscript. It might be a 
declaration, a message, a set of grievances, a protestation, a legal argument, 
or most commonly the speech of a member. But the characteristic that 
delimits it is that it was complete in itself, not a fragment of a larger whole. 
Another equally important characteristic of it is that it is always to 
be found in several, often many, copies. Every searcher in the Tudor 
and Stuart manuscripts in the British Museum is familiar with the many 
copies of parliamentary speeches and declarations to be found in those 
archives. 

The separates are hopelessly anonymous. There is never any tell- 
tale sentence such as "I went out after this speech," or "I could not get 
his words here" or "members cryed out at this," sentences common enough 
in the reports made by private members. Nor is there ever any evidence 
of that hurried informal writing which is to be foundinthe Commons Journals 
and in private diaries. The diaries are nearly always fragmentary, they 
abound in uncompleted sentences, they have phrases clipped off, they 
betra}^ the handiwork of some one who was writing things down as fast as 
he could, but could not get all. The separates are obviously the product 
of leisure. They have, most of them, full, roimded sentences, they are not 
at all conversational in style, but rather oratorical and fio^^'ing. They are 
full of delightful allusions to scripture and to the classic writers. They 



INTRODUCTION xxi 

reveal in every way the fact that they have been "written up." They give 
the names of the speakers in full and present the speeches in formal, full- 
dress fashion. They are finished productions intended for a wide circulation. 

It must not be supposed that separates exist only in isolation. We 
meet a separate of Glanville's speech, May 22, 1628, as a manuscript by 
itself, we find it with two or three other speeches on the same subject 
and at the same time, we find it with other speeches uttered on the same 
day but on other subjects, and we find it embodied in the middle of a bulky 
folio that gathers together speeches and news-letters of an entire session. 
It is these bulky folios which prove how highly the separates were valued 
by the historical collectors of that time , for they give proof of being nearly 
contemporary. It is largely as embodied in these folios that they have 
been known to historical students ever since, from Rushworth, Nalson 
and their contemporaries^ to our own time. It is a strange thing that 
these speeches in parliament have been taken at their face value with no 
criticism, that they have, indeed, been made a chief source for the parlia- 
mentary history of the early seventeenth century. In only an occasional 
instance did even the careful Gardiner impugn the value of a particular 
separate,^ never did he stop to consider them as a species of source material. 
It is then not only the number of the separates made at the time but even 
more the use that has been made of them since, that has made us feel the 
necessity of finding out what they really were. 

As early as the middle of Elizabeth's reign separates were in existence. 
Simonds D'Ewes in his great collection of parliamentary materials for 
Elizabeth's reign tells of the "manuscripts, or written fragments ... of 
Parliamentary Speeches, Petitions, and such like Passages, especially touch- 
ing the House of Commons."' As one hunts about in Elizabethan parliamen- 
tary stuff in the manuscripts room of the British Museum, one notices that 
for the last part of that reign there is an increasing nvunber of manuscripts 
of single speeches in the House of Commons, most of them to be found in 
multiple copies.* For the Parliament of 1610 there are several separates.* 

'John Lilbume in The Peoples Prerogative (1647) cites the parliament collections of separates known 
as Speeches and Passages of this Great and Happy Parliament as authority. See pt. iii, 28, 40, 73. 

2 2:77 n., 6:77 n., 9:105 n. 

' The Journals of all the Parliaments during the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, Preface A, verso. See e.g. 
Tanfield's speech, 481-82, and Wentworth's speech and questions, of which he says that he transcribed 
both from an "authentick and true copy." 410-11. 

* A speech in Parliament Anno Eliz. 39 upon the motion of subsidy. Ashm. (Bodleian) 800, no. 29. 
1593. Excerpts from speeches in Parliament of divers persons whose names are written in the margin 

Lansd. 73, no. 39. 

Mr. Peter Wentworth's speech in Parliament anno 1576 for which he was sent to the Tower. Stowe 302. 

A speech on occasion of her Majesty's releasing out of the Tower a member of the House of Commons, 
who in the beginning of the Sessions 1575 had been sent thither for uttering disrespectful things of her 
and her government. Harl. 6265, no. 17. 

A speech in the House of Commons 28 Nov. 1584 to excite to a vigorous stand for their defence against 
their enemies. Harl. 6265, f. 382. 

* A speech of Wm. Hakewill in the House of Commons against Impositions. Add. MSS 25, 271. 
Sir James Whitelocke had gathered several separates for 1610. See his Liber Famelicus (Camden 

Soc), 24. 



xxii INTRODUCTION 

From that time on such separates exist in untold numbers. Printed collec- 
tions such as Rushworth, Nalson, Frankland, and the Parliamentary 
History, etc. have embodied in their capacious pages a large number of the 
best known separates, most of them taken from manuscripts got hold of by 
the editors of those compilations. Unprinted collections are yet to be 
found by the hundreds, and not only in the British Museum and the Bod- 
leian Library but in inniunerable private collections of manuscripts.^ 
The same speech can often be found in scores of copies, usually with verbal 
variations, but variations that reveal at once a common original. 

That the separates existed in such large numbers of copies in so many 
different places is in itself an important consideration. That so many copies 
in so many different places go back nearly or quite to the time when the 
speeches were made shows that the manuscripts must have been widely 
distributed soon after they were delivered. Such a distribution of manu- 
scripts in copy was indeed no new thing. Court reports had long been so 
circulated.'' Various kinds of religious and political writings had found 
their way in manuscript from hand to hand long before they were ever 
printed. We know that there were four copies of the manuscript of Richard 
Hakluyt's Discourse of Western Planting.^ It is said that Shakespeare's 
sonnets existed in manuscript copies before they were printed. It is not 
to be wondered at that in a time of such great political excitement there 
was a demand for the circtdation of the speeches of members of the Com- 
mons in the same way. 

Not only was there a demand from the outside for such speeches but 
there was also a desire on the part of members to have their speeches cir- 
culated and so to bid for public approval. Such a desire grew with the rise 
of a party constantly and consistently opposed to the Court. Through- 
out the reign of Elizabeth the Commons were becoming more important in 
their own eyes and in the eyes of the country. As the Commons gained in 
influence, the Puritan group among them asserted theimselves the more. 
We cannot stop to prove it, but we may assert without fear of contradic- 
tion that the practice of preparing formal speeches developed almost syn- 
chronously with the rise of an opposition group. Since speeches in the 
Commons meant more than ever before, members were more ready to take 
pains by writing them out in advance. The member was the more willing 
to draw up a formal speech,^ if he believed himself to be fighting a popular 
cause. He felt that his appeal ought not to be shut within Westminster 
Hall. 

^ See the Appendix for a list of the separates for 1629 showing where the different copies are to be found. 

^ Dugdale to Sir Symon Archer, Mar. 15, 1638, Life, Diary, and Correspondence of Sir Wm. Dugdale 
(1827), 184. Justice Crooke's speech sold for 105 a copy. See also Howell, State Trials (1818-26), for many 
instances. 

* Collections of the Maine Hist. Soc, 2nd Series, Doc. Hist. II, xli. 

' "Againe heer Sir Ben. Rudyard was imploied, who but at such times and in such services, did speake, 
never but premeditated, which had more shew of memorie then affection." Eliot's Negoliutn Posterorum 
(1881), 1:75. 



INTRODUCTION xxiii 

But the committing of a speech to paper was not enough to ensure its 
circulation; the desire on the part of members for greater pubUcity ran 
counter to the old practice of keeping proceedings in Parliament secret. 
Unless that practice were broken down they could not hope to gain the 
popular support they sought. It was a practice, however, that went far 
back into the roots of English history, probably to the custom of secrecy 
in the King's Council. As a practice parliamentary secrecy means for our 
purposes two things, secrecy upon the part of the clerks and secrecy upon 
the part of the members. 

The clerk was required to swear that he "would keep secret all such 
matters as shall be treated in the said parliament and not disclose the 
same before they shall be published but to such as it ought to be disclosed 
unto."^° At the time this oath was in use there were, however, certain 
documents that naturally found a place in the Clerk's Book,^^ documents 
that he was accustomed to give to members, documents that were some- 
times published by authority, such documents as the speeches and mes- 
sages of the King^2 and the addresses of the Lord Keeper. ^^ 

But with the growing importance of the Commons, other materials 
were gaining a place in the Clerk's Book. The Commons were formulating 
petitions, remonstrances, lists of grievances, declarations, etc., and were 
attempting to give dignity and weight to them by asking for their insertion 
in the Clerk's Book. During the early Stuart period the Commons were 
aiming to change the precedents as to what should be published (that 
included permission to the members to copy).^^ They were doing this in 

1° Oath of Robert Bowyer, Jan. 30. 1609/10. Cottonian MSS Tib D.I. no. 1. 
Vowell [John Hooker] in his Order and Usage of the Keeping of a Parliament in England (Exeter, 1575) 
says of the clerk: "The counsell of the House he may not disclose." 

^ "Moved that a copy of the speech of the Speaker delivered today and the Kings answer by my Lord 
Keeper shall be entred together." Harl. 5324, f.37. 

■*- It may be asked how the King's speeches were taken down. In some cases of course the King wrote 
out his speech in advance and handed a copy to the clerk {Hist. MSS Comn. Ill, 29). This was generally 
the practice of James I, who was very careful about his phraseology, but not so often of Charles I. More 
often the King spoke without notes and a member or members of the Privy Council kept notes, turned 
them over to the King who revised them and "allowed" the speech (C.J. 1:892). Such versions made by 
Councillors are often to be found in the Record Office. There is an interesting case of this practice in 1607, 
when the King after making a speech "commanded Sir F. B. [Francis Bacon] and Sir H.M. [Henry 
Montagu] for that they had at the time of the speech taken notes, that therefore they should now sett it 
downe, which they did accordinglie upon their own notes and collections of Mr. P.B. and leaving the same 
to his Majestie who perused and perfected the said discourse and gave orders for the printing of it" (Harl. 
4945. f. 256). See also Grosvenor, Notes of Commons Debates 1628. (Trinity College, Dublin, E. 5-33-36 
III., Minn. 125) where the Lord Keeper (III, f. 45) made the notes of the King's speech as he delivered it. 
In another case in 1610 a member proposed that "gentlemen who took notes might set down what his 
Majesty's speech was," another member objected; then the Recorder suggested by way of compromise "that 
notes might be compared and the speech understood" (C.J. 1:430). After the attack upon the Five Mem- 
bers in 1642, the King that evening requested from Rush worth, assistant clerk of the Commons, whom he 
had seen taking notes, the notes of his speech, and got them (Rushworth, 4:478). In one case Secretary. 
Windebank offered a copy of the King's speech "as a copie that the King himself avowes' ' {Portland MSS 1:6). 

13 D'Ewes. Harl. 162, f. 98. Minn. 133. 

1^ "Ordered that such members of the house as will may take coppyes of the declaration to be presented 
to the King." Whitelocke, Notes of Commons Debates, June 15, 1626. Camb. Univ. Library, D.D. 12, 
20-22., Minn. 121a. We are citing the numbers in J. T. Gerould's Sources of English History, 1603- 
1689 in the University of Minnesota Library. We have cited first the reference to the original MS. The 
Minnesota reference is nearly always to rotographs and is cited for those who may wish to use the MS 
in this country. 



xxiv INTRODUCTION 

two ways: they were seeking so to manipulate the rules of secrecy as to 
limit the publication of the speeches of the King and the royal officials 
while they were getting their own documents into the Clerk's Book and 
before the public; and at the same time they were adding to those docu- 
ments that should find a place in the Clerk's Book and be given out, the 
legal arguments of their members and even the speeches. 

In 1621 the Venetian Ambassador in London wrote to the Doge and 
Senate: "I enclose a copy of the substance of the King's speech to this 
parHament ... I had great trouble in getting it owing to the efforts 
to prevent its circulation, contrary to the general custom for such things 
are usually printed. "^^ That the efforts to prevent circtdation came from 
the Commons themselves is seen from the following bit of debate from the 
session of 1628 when Coryton drew attention to the "speeches of the King 
and Buckingham newly printed." He said: "It concemes our proceedings 
in parliament and it seemes strange to mee to finde that any dares wright 
or print sutch businesses. "^^ Upon which Selden indignantly asked: "Shall 
the Counsells of Parliaments bee layed on stalls and shall any thus divulge 
them?"^^ Yet in this same session of 1628 members advocated the break- 
ing down of the rules of secrecy when the application was to documents 
favoring their own side. When the Fourteen Propositions for the Army 
and Navy were introduced into the Commons, Secretary Coke spake up 
and said: "I will not contradict any good intentions of this house. Let 
there bee coppyes taken, if you please, of these propositions, but make 
them not publique. Confine them only to ParHament men." To this Sir 
John Strangeways repHed: "I am not'(of opinion that these propositions 
should bee confined to Parliament,- wee have leaft beehinde us in the country 
as wise men as any wee have here, f^ Shall wee not make use of their advice?"'* 
The truth was, of course, that the "Country Party" in parHament wished 
to put its case before the pubHc and did not Hke to see the King's case so 
put. Hence their inconsistencyjregarding the rules of secrecy.'^ 

« Cat. St. p. Venetian, 1619-21, 577. 

"Borlase. Stowe, 366, f. 69., Minn. 127. 

" Mass. MS. f. 84 verso., Minn. 124a. 

18 Borlase. Stowe 366, ff. 19 verso- 20. 

13 Of course it was not only a* matter' of custom' and precedent as to what the clerk gave out. Many 
documents no doubt slipped out from the clerk's table with no intention on his part. On this matter we 
get some light from an incident that happened on April 24, 1641. The Clerk of the Commons reported 
that morning that he had "casuallie found the examination of Sir Henrie Fane [Vane] . . . taken in 
the Earle of Straffords business." The clerk was criticized for having ever lost the document and D'Ewes 
came to his rescue: "I conceived the Clarke was in little fault in this particular for usuallie when the 
House rises sometimes tenn or twelve members of the House and sometimes moore come about the table 
and desire to see severall particulars which they doe after come and call upon the clarke for copies or orders 
which they are to use and hee is to deliver.' ■, Whilest hee is busie in satisfying the later and more necessarie 
demands, those who looked on severall papers come and lay them downe promiscuouslie" (Harl. 163, 
f. 97). D'Ewes goes on to describe the confusion about the clerk's table. .Under such circumstances it 
is little wonder if members got hold of many documents and copied them. 



INTRODUCTION xxv 

At the same time that the members of the Commons were trying to 
regulate the giving out of official documents so as to weaken the advantage 
that the Court had had, they were so manipulating matters as to have 
further presentations of their own case given out by the clerk under the 
official stamp. They were arranging to have the clerk give out legal argu- 
ments and later they were authorizing the clerk to procure certified copies 
of certain speeches and allow their distribution to members, they were even 
ordering that certain speeches be officially printed. There was of course 
a case for giving out legal arguments. The arguments were a species of 
their own quite distinct from speeches ; they were by no means made up 
of periodic sentences but consisted almost wholly of closely reasoned briefs 
set down in short phrases. They were too technical to be remembered by 
members of the Commons and perhaps for that reason they were fur- 
nished to members much more readily than were ordinary speeches. Such 
argtmients form a considerable part of any parliamentary collection for 1628, 
that year which marks the culmination of the legal battle between King 
and Commons. That they came originally from the clerk there can be 
no doubt. On April 14, 1628, this record is to be found in the Commons 
Journals. "Sir Edward Coke, Sir Dudley Digges, Mr. Littleton, Mr. 
Selden, which argued the case of the liberty of the persons of the subjects 
from imprisonment to bring in, by Thursdaj'- next, their several arguments, 
fair written ; as also the copies of the records produced by them ; and the clerk 
to insert the arguments into the Journal, and to have liberty to give out 
copies of them. "2° Moreover there are to be found in manuscript the 
arguments of Selden and of Digges marked "ex Jo. Wright,"^^ who was at 
that time Clerk of the Commons. 

It seems a good conjecture that the practice of giving out these argu- 
ments began almost as soon as the Commons began their struggle with 
the King's lawyers. Perhaps it was for giving out doctmients that told 
against the King that Wright was out of favor with the Court; we know 
that after the adjournment in 1621 he with others was arrested.^^ He 
continued to be out of favor, for in 1629 Sir James Bagg wrote to a friend; 
"Wright the Clerke of Parliament of all men sithence my being of that 
House hath done worst service to his Majestic. Conferre with some of 
his servants about him, he is the most usefullest man of the House. "^^ 

By 1641 the practice had become common. On February 6 of that year 
the Commons debated whether or not they should have St. John's able 
statement of Ship-Money, as given in conference before the two Houses, 

«" C.J. 1:883. See also 887. 

^Gurney MSS Misc. .xxiv, ff. 211, 229; Bute MSS, Hist. xxiv. Proceedings in Parliament, ff. 277-78. 

22 Diary of Walter Yonge (Camden Soc.) 41. 

^ State Papers Dom. Car. I, xcvi, no. 36. 



xxvi INTRODUCTION 

printed.^* Simonds D'Ewes remarked: "I doubt not but that this Declara- 
tion was soe pretious as everie member of this House will conceive it 
worth the copying out. And this would add much more esteeme to it then 
to have it published."^^ On April 30 of the same year, Stroud moved "that 
Mr. SoUicitor might bee in joined by the House to bring a true copie of his 
said argument into the House that all men who would might have a copie 
of the same. "2® Yelverton's suggestion seems to have been followed, and 
it was precisely this that was often done. Not always, however, were the 
Commons willing that the arguments should be given out. In Northcote's 
diary for 1640 there is an allusion to the distribution of arguments: "Sir 
John Hotham spake against Mr. Rushworth taking notes." In consequence 
a committee was appointed "to view the clerk's book every Saturday to 
allow what they think fit to be preserved and no copies of arguments. And 
to examine what copies have been given, and to whom."'^ This passage 
would seem not to prove so much that copies were not allowed to be given 
out as that they were given out with discrimination. 

But it was not only legal arguments that the Commons wished to have 
given out officially but also the speeches of private members, that is those 
that met with special approval. There is, however, no evidence that speeches 
of private members were receiving the stamp of the Clerk of the Commons, 
until 1641. Even then it was only occasionally that a speech in the Com- 
mons met with such hearty approval that the clerk was ordered to ask the 
author of it to bring into the House a correct version for the members to 
make copies from.^^ On April 30 of that year the Commons ordered that 
"Mr. Pym might bring in true copies of his first and last speeches delivered 
in Westminster Hall, that such as would might likewise take copies of 
them. "2^ At that time speeches were more often printed than copied; 
and among the printed speeches are found those with the clerk's imprimatur 
either at the beginning or end.^" 

In getting precedents changed as to the publication of documents by 
the clerk, the Commons had not gained much by the end of the third 
parliament of Charles I. The publication of declarations, petitions, and 
grievances, even of legal arguments was not enough to give them any 

^ A poor version of St. John's speech had been printed and the Commons resolved to punish the printer. 
C.J., II. 80. 

25 Harl. 162, f. 203 A., Minn. 133. 

26 D'Ewes. Harl. 163, f. 120. Minn. 133. 
2^ Northcote, Note Book (1877), liii. 

28 It is interesting that when the Commons authorized the clerk to have one of Pym's speeches printed, 
they put it in this way, that Master Pym be desired to put the speech he made into writing and deliver it 
into the House and that it may be printed. See A speech delivered at a conference with the Lords by John 
Pym. Esq. E. 200 (21). 

29 D'Ewes. Harl. 163. f. 120. 

^° In one case a bit of the clerk's notes were^added at the end of the speech, the notes being the same 
as those in the Commons Journals. Cf. E 200 (21) with C.J. 2:396. 



INTRODUCTION xxvu 

advantage over the Court, if indeed an equality. They were still handi- 
capped because the great bulk of the partisan material was contained in 
the speeches, and, while the publication of the speeches of the King and 
of his Ministers had been only sHghtly curtailed, the giving out of other 
speeches, many of which were likely to be favorable to the Country Party,^^ 
had not been allowed at all. 

Yet though these speeches were not being given out b}^ the clerk, the 
fact is that they were appearing in great numbers; they make up by far 
the greater part of any collection of separates for that time. How was 
this taking place? What was happening? The answer to that question 
is really the main business of this chapter, for the official separates were 
but a small fraction of the total number. We come at length then to our 
principal discussion. That discussion involves first of all a consideration 
of the rules of secrecy as applied to private members. They were not 
supposed to give information to the public ; they had long been expected 
to preserve reticence as to what went on in the Houses; that meant that 
the member must not talk too freely about the Court or in the City, it 
meant that he must not give out copies of his own prepared speeches.^^ 
The conception of a parliament acting under the glare of "pitiless publicity" 
is exceedingly modem. But things were changing. The medieval notion 
of secrecy could not well be lived up to in a time when public opinion was 
beginning to get in its work. Members who found their chief support 
in the struggle against the Court in their own country constituencies could 
not easily be estopped from telling the people "back home" what was 
going on; they were not willing to refrain from releasing their speeches 
for sympathisers in the city and country to read. In the growing excite- 
ment of the struggle between King and parliament the principle of secrecy 
was swxe to lose. 

Nevertheless the common law of parliament was on the side of secrecy 
and that common law was sure to be asserted. Although it was becoming 
increasingly easy to evade the rules of secrecy, no member could openly 
violate them without bringing down upon himself the condemnation of 
the House. The following quotation from the Borlase news-letters for 
1628 tells its own story: "Mr. Cowcher presents a letter to the house 
directed to him from the Towne of Worcester . . . The beginninge of 
the letter was thus . . . Wee thanke you for givinge us intelligence of 
your proceedings in parHament. This beginninge had allmost spoyled all 

21 The term "Country Party" is used here a little in advance of its time. But as a matter of fact the 
term "Country" was coming in, in the early twenties if not before. 

^ On February 6, 1640-41, when the Commons were discussing the bad copy of St. John's Declaration 
that had got out, D'Ewes made a speech: "Our speeches ifl this House were like the Sibilline orailes an- 
tientlie kept in Rome which were Arcana Sacra and not to bee divulged" (Harl. 162, f. 203 A). On July 22, 
1641, it was "ordered that all the members of the House are enjoined to dehver out no copy or notes of 
anything that is brought into the House, propounded, or agitated in the House." C.J. 2:220. 

1 



xxviii INTRODUCTION 

the rest."^' But the law was asserted more positively when the demand 
for news had become intense and there were men hanging around West- 
minster ready to capitalize that demand and furnish news and copies of 
speeches to a far greater extent than had ever been done before. The 
Country Party was willing enough to ignore parliamentary common 
law in order to give out the speeches of their own party. But when these 
speeches came out without their connivance, in wretched versions, when 
the speeches of the Court also flooded the market, very telHng speeches 
sometimes, the "Country" leaders were quick to push through the Commons 
resolutions against those whom they held responsible. The inconsistencies 
of the Country Party in enforcing the laws regarding secrecy against private 
members were fully as great as their inconsistencies in respect to the pub- 
lication of documents. They were willing to let the speeches of their own 
party get out, and from this leakage developed the production and circu- 
lation of separates. It is a subject that must be dealt with in great detail. 

We have first to account for the circulation of prepared speeches. In 
nearly all cases the authors of the speeches were themselves responsible 
for giving them out. They passed them out to their friends, and their 
friends allowed their friends to copy them until presently the circulation 
was quite beyond the control of those who had started it. There can be 
no doubt that the practice began almost as early as the practice of prepar- 
ing speeches in advance, i.e. dining the reign of Elizabeth. In the Pro- 
logomena to his Journals of all the Parliaments of Elizabeth Sir Simonds 
D'Ewes alludes to the separate speeches which he inserted: "The tran- 
scripts of some speeches I had myselfe by mee being the verie autographs 
or first copies, penned by such as spake them, as did evidentlie appeare by 
ther manie interlinings."^* This evidence is corroborated by Peter Heylyn 
in his statement that the practice of making prepared speeches in parliament 
was a recent practice, and that members not only took delight in "tedious 
speeches, but at first disperst copies of them in writing and afterwards 
caused them to be printed, that all the people might take notice of the 
zeal they had to the common Hberty of the nation. "^^ 

In his introduction to the collection of speeches for 1628 which he pub- 
lished under the name of Ephemeris Parliamentaria, Thomas Ftdler gives 
a picture of the practice as it existed at that time: "Some gentlemen, 
Speakers in the Parliament, imparted their speeches to their intimate 
friends; the transcripts thereof were multiplied amongst others (the penne 
being very procreative of issue of this nature :) and since it hath happened 
that the Gentlemens Originalls have in these troublous times miscarried, 

^ Stowe 366. f. 66. 

3* Hirl. 73, f. 7, verso. D'Ewes speaking in the Long Parliament says of Digby's speeches, which got 
out: "three of his former speeches . . . which could come . . . but from his owne hand." Harl. 163, 
f. 136. 

^ Heylyn, Examen Historicum (1659), pt. 2, p. 74. 



INTRODUCTION xxix 

yet so that the fountain (as I may say) being dried up, hath fetcht this 
water from the channell, and they have again suppHed their losses from those 
to whom they civilly communicated a copy of their paines."^^ And in the 
forties the practice was still going on. In 1649 Bulstrode Whitelocke writes: 
"I informed them [the Rump Commons] out of records and histories as 
well as I could of their constitution [i.e. of the House of Lords]: some 
desired notes of my speech, and had them."^^ And Nalson, in speaking 
of the many inaccurate and fictitious speeches that got out at that time 
says: "Yet I am not without good authority that divers of those speeches 
were the true children of those parents at whose doores they were laid."^^ 
But most speeches in the Commons were not careftdly prepared in ad- 
vance, were not put into shape to be readily given out. A very large number 
of separates of speeches which are to be found today did not originate with 
the speakers themselves. They are speeches in the give-and-take of debate. 
These bear no trace of that painstaking phraseology so full of classical 
and biblical allusion, these speeches betray quick sharp rebuttal. As 
Thomas Fuller says: "Many worthies there were in that place who only 
were dexterous at short and quick retumes."^^ The speeches of such mem- 
bers must have been put together afterwards from notes. And there are 
other speeches of length which evidence the fact that they must have been put 
into shape only from notes, that they were not carefully prepared, formal 
productions.^" Often they were productions the speakers themselves would 
have promptly disavowed. As early as 1588 we find Sir Edward Hoby 
complaining in the House that one high in authority had received a false 
report of a speech made by him.^^ And at the later period Sir Edward 
Deering stated in the House: "My speech . . . crept out from his 
fellowes by stealth . . . Some faultes are in itt."^^ These are the sep- 
arates the responsibility for which has never been located. Yet it is most 
important that it should be, for it is right here that we have the faint 
beginning of the reporting of parHamentary news. There seem to be 
only two possibilities; either they were written by someone inside the 
House from his own notes taken at the time, or else the work was done 
by an outsider from such information as he could obtain. 

^ Preface, 5 verso. 

" Whitelocke, Memorials of the English Affairs (Oxford 1853). 2:521. 

»« 2:xi. 

'"' Ephemeris Parliamenlaria. Preface. 4 verso. 

*" The very phrasing of the title of the separate sometimes indicates how it was put together. "An 
Occasional Speech of Sir Simonds D'Ewes (as near as it could be collected together) delivered at a con- 
ference by a Committee of Both I^ouses ... on Friday Morning, July 2, 1641." Diurnall Occurrences, 
1640-41, (1641) 125. A separate of Eliot's indicates the same thing — "A Collection of the substance of 
a speech made by Sir John Eliot." Harl. 6800. f. 339. 

*1 Haywood Townshend. Historical Collections . . . of the Four last Parliaments of Queen Elizabeth 
(1680). 18. 

^ Sir Edward Deering to his wife, Jan. 24, 1642. Proceedings in Kent in 1640, xliii. 



XXX INTRODUCTION 

A close scrutiny of the separates themselves inclines one to the latter 
alternative. This is not due alone to the fact that the separates differ so 
in the style of writing from the Commons Journals on the one hand or from 
the private diary on the other. In either case that could be explained by 
the fact that they were "written up" afterwards for an outside pubHc, 
though it is extremely improbable that under the existing rules regarding 
secrecy either the clerk or a private member would have deliberately carried 
on such a practice. The conclusion is rather based on the fact that the 
separates betray the fact that they were written by someone not wholly 
familiar with what was going on in the House, someone who was piecing 
together information received from different sources. There are many 
speeches where the line of thought is confused ;^^ yet a comparison with 
the private diaries shows that the words are nearly correct. It is some- 
times possible to take these speeches apart and (by the aid of the private 
diaries) put them together again, like a jigsaw puzzle, in the right order. 
In order to prove that these separates were the work of an outsider, it is 
necessary to answer two questions. How could an outsider obtain the 
requisite information for putting together the separates? Who were the 
men who would consider it worth their while to follow such a business? 

It has already been noted that the rules of secrecy as they concerned 
the members were being disregarded, that members were freely circulating 
their own prepared speeches. But the abuse went much farther than that, 
private members were also responsible for the circulation of speeches other 
than their own. During the Parliament of 1610 a man, who was probably 
a member of the Commons, wrote letters to a friend in the country, and 
with those letters sent manuscripts of certain speeches. "I hope," he wrote 
"I have satisfied your desire in sending you as perfect a Copy of the Lord 
Treasurer's speech as you could have from any other hand, for I did dili- 
gently employ my tables, and made use of the like collection of two gentle- 
men of the Lower House who had both better braines and swifter pens 
then I." That what he was doing was unwarranted he recognizes in the 
same letter when he asks his friend to see that "noe notice be taken of my 
name because it is a tickle thing for a privat man to be the reporter of such 
speeches as come out of the mouths of men in great places."^* 

That members were giving out their prepared speeches, that they were 
even taking notes in the House not only for their own use but for commu- 
nication to friends proves of course the great laxity with which members 

** Frankland in telling of the Parliament of 1620 quotes a manuscript from a "Collector" and says: 
"The King is said by the Collector to have made this speech following to the parliament; but the speech 
is not the Kings but a hodge-podge of the Collectors; the true speech of his Majesty followeth the other 
of the Collectors." Frankland, Annals of King James and King Charles the First (1681), 47. 

** A Letter from G.D. to his friend A.W. in Middleburgh advertising him of the occurrences in Parlia- 
ment and withal sending him a coppie of the late Lord Treasurer Cecil's speech. Commons Debates in 1610 
(Camden Soc), 153, 154, 



INTRODUCTION xxxi 

treated the rules of secrecy. We have already implied that from the time 
of Elizabeth any objection to publicity that was voiced in the House was 
in reality due altogether to the character of the information that got out. 
Either that information favored the King's side or it slandered the oppo- 
sition who were likely to put in a claim that they were being falsely reported. 
Such were the claims of Sir Edward Hoby and Sir Edward Deering which 
have just been noted. That there was just cause for such complaint even 
as early as 1588, that the practice even then had become a common one, 
we may be sure, for in that year it became necessary for the Speaker to deliver 
an "Admonition ... to the whole House against the uttering the secrets 
of this House, either in Table-talk or Notes in Writing. "^^ It is easy to 
see how the idle talk of a member, growing as gossip is sure to grow, or 
warped by its deliberate distortion by an enemy, might at last be written 
down and so receive the semblance of first-hand notes. 

But in the making of such a separate we are presupposing that there 
was someone to whom the making of separates was of enough concern for 
him to seek out the stray bits of information that went from mouth to 
mouth, someone who was glad in that way to supplement what separates 
he could obtain from the copies of copies of documents and legal arguments 
given out by the clerk and of the speeches prepared and given out by the 
speakers and their friends. We have already pointed out that the separates 
themselves reveal that he was an outsider, not a member of the Commons. 
We now go a step farther and maintain that he was a person who carried 
on the pursuit for profit. Not only was there great industry shown in the 
gathering together and manufacturing of the separates but even more 
businesslike was the way they were circulated throughout the country. 
That circulation was much more extensive, much more prompt and regular 
than can be explained by the communications of friends. More than that 
we have the conclusive evidence that the separates were obtained for a 
price. It is indeed from the circulation that we get the last link in the 
chain of proof as to the authorship of the separates. 

To circulate speeches in manuscript was comparatively safe, and beyond 
doubt profitable for those who had it in hand. It can easily be proved 
that those in charge of the distribution of speeches — whoever they were — sent 

^ Heywood Townshend, Historical Collections . . . of the Four last Parliaments of Queen Elizabeth, 18. 

^' That many members of parliament possessed copies of speeches can readily be proved from the manu- 
scripts in the country houses of today belonging to the descendants of those members. The Crewe version 
of the True Relation of 1629 was derived from the manuscript of Sir Thomas Crewe, a member of that par- 
liament. The Napier copies of numerous speeches in the Parliament of 1628 were derived by the editor 
of the old Parliamentary History from the great grandson of the Napier who belonged to the Parhament 
of 1628. The speeches for several parliaments belonging to Lord St. Germans go back to Sir John Ehot, 
and the Knightley parliamentary manuscripts recently sold by Lady Knightley of Fawsley go back to 
Richard Knightley, who played a role of some importance in several early seventeen th century parliaments. 
For the Manchester Manuscripts, the Bute Manuscripts and several others, the same natural derivation can 
be proved. Pym had a "trunk full of papers, written books, and journals of Parliament taken from him" 
in May 1640. Cat. St. P. Dotn., 1640, 153. 



xxxii INTRODUCTION 

out as many as fifty or seventy-five copies of such speeches. Members of 
parliament,*^ important coimty families,*^ great nobles/^ politically affected 
clergymen,*^ ambassadors from foreign states,^" Privy Councillors^^ and 
less important people possessed copies and possessed them very shortly 
after the speeches in question had been uttered. In many instances such 
persons received copies regularly throughout the session of parliament. 
During the Parliament of 1628, the Reverend Joseph Mead of Cambridge 
received almost daily manuscript news-letters and separates of the Com- 
mons debates.^2 During the Long Parliament the Montague family got 
reports from the parliament. 

One could go on to give other illustrations, but better evidence than 
these isolated cases is the fact that most of the manuscript copies show the 
marks of having been mailed. They are nearly all of them once or twice 
creased where they had been folded. Sometimes they have on the back 
the address to which they are being sent.^' 

But they were not only being sent into the country, they were, perhaps 
to an even greater extent, being gathered by the men at Westminster, 
who read for their own profit and sent them on to their relatives" and 
friends.^^ We know, for example, that Robert BaiUie, Scottish Commis- 
sioner in London during the Long Parliament, forwarded them in almost 
every one of those racy letters that he sent north.^^ They were getting them 
also to supplement their private diaries of the proceedings. Sir Edward 
Nicholas in his Proceedings and Debates in the House of Commons in 1620 
and 1621, that very full account of a long course of Commons debates, 
prepared almost certainly for the perusal of the King and the Privy Council, 
would sometimes after giving a report of a speech in his own pat summary, 

^^ See preceding page for this note. • 

<^ E.g. Wm. Bromley of Baginton, Warwickshire. Add. MSS 36, 828. 

Lord Leconfield. Hisl. MSS Comn. VI. 306. Miss C. Griffith's MSS ibid. V, 412. 
Sir A. A. Hood, Bart. Hist. MSS Comn. VI, 351. 

^ See Buccleuch and Queensberry MSS I, 294. 

See Carte MSS (Bodleian) LXXVII, f. 433 where the speeches of Seymour and Wentworth in the ses- 
sion of 1628, folded for mailing, are to be found in the Huntingdon MSS. 

« Diary of Ret. John Rous (Camden Soc), 100, 104-8., Parr's Life of Ussher (1686), 398. 

^o Cal. St. P. Venetian, 1619-1621, 231, 577; 1623-1625, 227, 234. 

^^ In the Cal. St. P. Dom. 1640-1641, 297-98 there is a speech of Read's calendared which is in Read's hand- 
writing and endorsed by Secretary Windebank. It is a speech that, so far as we know, got no circulation. 
In another instance a speech of Sir Benjamin Rudyard's delivered March 22, 1628 and in general circu- 
lation is to be found written out in Nicholas's handwriting in the same words among the governmental 
documents. State Pap. Dom. Car. I, xcviii. no. 4. 

^2 Court and Times of Charles I (1848), 1:347-48 et aliter. 

^^ In Karl. 6255 are to be found many of the separates for 1628, each one once folded, evidently for mail- 
ing, others are to be found in Cambridge, Add. 27; Ashm. (Bodleian) 830; f. 196. Harl. 1219. 

^E.g. D'Ewes to Lady D'Ewes, Autobiography and Correspondence of Sir Simonds D'Ewes, Bart. (Lon- 
don 1845), 2:256-57. 

Sir John Coke the Yoxmger to Sir John Coke, Melbourne MSS 2: 310. 

"John Millington to Gilbert M. CaL St. P. Dom. 1628-29. 43. 

"BaiUie. Letters and Journals (1841). 1:277. 292, 307. 



INTRODUCTION xxxiii 

include the standard separate.^^ Bulstrode Whitelocke has many separates 
in his diary of the Commons for 1626. Sir Simonds D'Ewes in his volumi- 
nous diary of the Long Parliament had the separates copied in by his 
secretary. Though Sir Richard Grosvenor did not insert the separates 
in the body of his note-book, he undoubtedly possessed them, for on the 
fly-leaf of his diary of 1629 he gives a long list of the standard separates 
to which he has added: "These I have."^^ 

Sir Simonds D'Ewes also furnishes us with evidence as to the prompt- 
ness with which separates were issued. As a general thing he left a space 
in his diary where his secretary was to copy in the separate; but where 
this was not done, we find that the separate was inserted about a week 
after the delivery of the speech. For their coming out in about a week we 
have further evidence in a bound series of news-letters for 1628 that were 
at one time in the possession of William Borlase. There the separates, 
often on paper of a different size (showing that they came from different 
sources), are of a date about a week earlier than the news-letters that they 
immediately follow. 

The extent of the circulation of separates and the promptness with which 
it was carried on of itself would go far to prove that it was a business con- 
ducted for profit. But on that point we are not left in doubt. There is 
an account of parliamentary proceedings preserved in the Inner Temple 
on the fly-leaf of which the owner has put down how much he paid for each 
speech. So important is this point that the whole list bears reproducing. 
Note how the prices varied depending both on the reputation of the speaker 
and the importance and interest of the particular speech. The list shows 
too the early date at which the sale of separates had begun, the latest of 
them belonging to the session of 1628. 



2 Lord Keepers Speeches 


4 


• 6 


Kings Speach 







10 


Sir Robt Cottons 




2 




For Sending 







6 


Propositions 







4 


The petition to Mr 


Johnson 







Sir Robert Cottons 




2 





Sir John Elliots peti [ti ]on 


1 





Dukes Speech 







6 



" Proceedings and Debates of the House of Commons in 1620 and 1621 (Oxford, 1766), 2:228-41. Nicholas 
includes after his own notes, "Mr. Pymmes speech at large." 

*' See also May's speech of August 10, 1625 as given in Debates in the House of Commons in 1625 (Cam- 
den Soc), 110-12, and in Eliot's Negolium Posterorum, 2:84-85. The similarity of the two makes it evident 
that both writers were using a standard separate. Cf. also Rudyard's speech as found in Debates in 1625, 
9-11 with Eliot, 1:66-68. Walter Yonge has inserted a separate of the Commons Declaration, June 4, 
1621. Diary of Walter Yonge (Camden Soc), 39-40. 



xxxiv INTRODUCTION 

Sir Francis Semore 

Sir Joh: Went worths 1 10 

Sir Robert Phillips 

In the same volume on folio 19 is another similar record. 

Precedents of Record 8 

Selden's Reply- 
Sir D[udley] Diges Introduction ° 

Sir Henry Martin and Mr Glanville 5 

Sir Edward Cooke pte 2 6 

Seldens Argument 8 

Remonstrance 5 

Peticion of Right 2 6 

Objections of the Lords g sg 

Littleton pte 

If the separates were being sold instead of privately circulated, the 
men whom we should natiurally suspect were the scriveners and stationers, 
the men who did cop3dng of documents and manuscripts, the men who 
sold copies of manuscripts and the men who printed them for sale. Scriv- 
eners were more properly the copiers of manuscripts, stationers more 
properly the printers. But the terms cross into one another so often, and 
the work done by the two different kinds of men was so often interrelated 
that we have used the two terms together and will so use them throughout. 
That these men produced the separates there is much evidence. 

Early in 1641 stationers were being fetched constantly before the Com- 
mons for printing speeches without authorization. The officers of the 
Stationers Company were being urged to the task of prevention of "licen- 
tious printing." In Jtme of 1641 the Cormnons asked the Wardens of the 
Company to "use the best means they can for Preventing and Suppressing 
of them."^° D'Ewes interprets their resolution: "in particular they are to 
suppresse a great volume of speeches of this House in folio which is now 
to be printed. "^^ This was beyond doubt the collection of speeches 
which was in November to shp through the press, the weU-known Speeches 
and Passages}'^ From this time on the Commons Journals are fuU of resolu- 
tions about the unruly printers and "venters of manuscripts." Not one 
or two stationers but many were brought before the Commons. 

The zeal of the Commons against the scriveners and stationers is proof 
of the activities of those men and there is much further evidence. Sir 

69 Petyt MSS, 538, vol. 18. f. 46. 

«o C.J. 2:168. 

*i D'Ewes. Harl. 163, f. 276. D'Ewes tells us at another point (£.270) that "It was Thomas Harper, a 
writer in Little Brittain, who had a purpose to print many speeches made by the members of the house . . . 
in one volume together in folio." , 

^ Speeches and Passages of this Great and Happy Parliament (1641). 



INTRODUCTION xxxv 

Simonds D'Ewes in one of his own speeches to the Long Parliament said: 
"There were now abiding in and about London certain loose beggarly 
scholars who did in alehouses invent speeches and make speeches of mem- 
bers of the House, "®^ and at another time: "I had yesternight a speech 
brought me by a stationer to whom one John Bennet, a poet lodging in 
Shoe-Lane, sold it for half a crown to be printed."^* We know also that in 
1640 a stationer, William Stanesby, who as early as 1626 had been collecting 
parliamentary manuscripts,^^ complained because the Government con- 
fiscated his large assortment of "manuscripts, journals, and other passages 
of Parhament with divers other notes and papers of several natures to the 
number of about 300 quires of paper. "^^ We know too of a stationer, 
Thomas Harper, who got into trouble with the Commons for printing 
Strafford's speeches. He had gathered speeches for each day during the 
trial and was printing them when the stationers put a stop to it.®' The 
same notion of the scrivener is conveyed by Baillie who says of one of 
Pym's best speeches: "Some of the passages of it, and no more but some, 
and these defaced, I send you in print, as they have been taken in speaking 
by some common hand."^* 

If the stationers had such a flourishing business after printing of speeches 
began, we may fairly suppose that they were in charge of the distribution 
of earlier speeches. And we have very definite evidence to support that con- 
tention. In 1621 a speech came into circulation attributed to Sir Edward 
Cecil, a speech urging the importance of granting an immediate supply 
for the Palatinate. This speech, Gardiner says, was a forgery and quotes 
a letter from Carleton to Chamberlain who says that one Tumour was its 
true father.®^ Carleton was no doubt right, for Tumour appears again; 
in 1626 the Commons resolved to send for a scrivener by name Tumour 
who had given out a copy of the Remonstrance to the King before it had 
been presented to him.^*^ In 1 628 we know that a scrivener of Holbom named 
Willoughby was selling copies of the Remonstrance drawn up at that time 
by Parliament. ^^ We have another bit of evidence as to the business in 
parliamentary speeches in this earlier period. Thomas Frankland, who in 
1681 brought out a workaday history of the reigns of James I and Charles I,. 

fiSHarl. 162, f. 351b. 

^ Harl. 162, f. 376. Bennet was summoned to attend the Printing Committee. C.J. 2:422. 

^ State Papers Dom. Car. I. xxvi, no. 48. Stanesby was associated with Nathaniel Butter in issuing 
corantoes. See State Papers Dom. Jac. I, clvii, no. 40. Stanesby had earlier had his printing house "nailed 
up" and his presses broken by the Stationers Company on the warrant of the Council. Idem. 

^ Hist. MSS Comn. IV, 54, 

" D'Ewes. Hari. 163, f. 270. 

^ Baillie, Letters and Journals, 1:348. 

63 History of England, 1603-42, 4:28 n. 

"C.J.. 1:844. 

" See D.N.B. sub. Felton, by Sir Sidney Lee. 



xxxvi INTRODUCTION 

impugned Rushworth's version of one of James' speeches before the Par- 
liament of 1621, and declared that he had got hold of a much better copy 
from a Mr. Munday, then in 1681, actuary, i.e. recording clerk of the 
Convocation, "a very aged person, and yet alive . . . having the copy 
thereof (now in my keeping) always in his custody, and wherof he hath 
delivered several transcripts to persons of eminency above 40 years ago, 
who desired the same."^^ Now if Mr. Munday was an actuary, a clerk 
who wrote down proceedings in 1681, and above forty years ago, i.e. before 
the Short or Long ParHament, he was one of the very men for whom we 
have been looking, one of the scriveners who were in the business of furnish- 
ing separates. It was, of course, chiefly to the publication of speeches 
on the King's side that the Commons really objected. "Such was the 
iniquity of the times," says John Nalson, "which would not indure loyal 
truth that few of them were permitted to bemade publick."^^ From 1628 
on to 1642 it is evident enough that speeches supporting the "Country" 
could find their way out of the Commons House with little objection raised. 
If the speeches came from well-lmown leaders of either party there was, 
however, the keenest competition to get them out. In one case we find that 
a speech sold forty-five hundred copies.'* Says the author of A Presse-full 
of Pamphlets, a tract published in 1642, speaking of the stationers and scriv- 
eners: "Besides they have a corner in their venters to breed Conferences, 
Speeches, Petitions, Declarations, etc."" 

From the evidence presented the activity of the stationers in the pro- 
duction of separates is, we hope, established, but one question is raised which 
needs further elucidation. For the carrying out of their enterprise the sta- 
tioners could not have depended entirely upon haphazard ways of obtaining 
their information ; there must have been some collusion between them and 
members of parHament. That there was such collusion in the case of 
prepared speeches there is ample proof. We know that after the printing of 
speeches began to be tolerated during the Long Parliament, again and again 
members made arrangements for the printing of their speeches.'^ Occa- 
sionally we find, as on one of John White's speeches in 1641, the direct 
evidence, "printed by his own copie with additions."" In many cases we 
find proof that the writer, either before or after the delivery of his speech, 
had turned in a copy to the stationers. In one case, if the none too safe 

^ Preface to Thomas Frankland, Annals of King James and King Charles I. 

^' Nalson, 1 : Ixxviii. So hard was it for royalist speeches to get into circulation that Charles expressed 
surprise when one of Deering's utterances was allowed to pass the press. Proceedings in Kent in J 1640. xlv. 

'* Proceedings in Kent in 1640, xliii. 

'6 E. 142 (9). 

''^Stationers' Register, March 21, 1640; May 25. 1641; July 5, 1641; July 8. 1641; January 27, 1641/2. 

" A Speech of John White, concerning Episcopacy, Printed by his own Copy with Additions. London 1641. 
E. 198 (18). 

A side-note in the Borlase news-letter for May 14 may indicate the same thing. We find there: "This 
report of Mr. Pimms is ... in verbis conceptis." Stowe 366, f. 165. 



INTRODUCTION xxxvii 

Sanderson is to be trusted, one of Eliot's speeches was in circulation as 
soon or sooner than it was spoken in the House. Sanderson is speaking 
of the speech delivered by Eliot on March 2, 1629, and he says: "And so 
in love he was, of what he meant to say, that the heads thereof were copied 
and published to the Treasurer, who prepared the King with a message 
that followed his speech immediately."^^ In many other cases it is easy to 
prove that Eliot must have furnished stationers or scriveners with his 
speeches. We find copies of those speeches, presumably put out by the 
stationers and certainly sold for money, which agree almost word for word 
with copies of his speeches to be found amcng his own manuscripts, care- 
fully corrected in his own handwriting. It is easy to find speeches which 
show traces of careful revision before they were offered to the stationer.^® 
In some instances the stationers edited the speeches given to them. Again 
and again the stationer must have had before him a complete copy of a 
speech and have made from it a briefer edition. What he did in such a 
case was to keep many of the exact phrases, the more felicitious ones, and 
omit whole sentences and less interesting parts of the argument. If this 
were not enough to show the relation between the speaker and stationer 
examples could be cited where the stationers had circulated a speech, 
easily recognizable as that of the man to whom it is attributed, a speech 
that bears evidence of his painstaking work, but which was never delivered.^" 
More common, however, are cases where the speaker handed in his pre- 
pared speech and then under the stress of a particular situation in debate 
gave a speech that was in parts quit© different from that which he had 
planned, and, in consequence, from that given to the public. 

For the other speeches which were obviously written from notes we 
have already shown how the stationers could have picked up their infor- 
mation in tap-rooms and elsewhere, much as the clever reporter picks up 
his news today. Now and then perhaps an enterprising scrivener crept 
into some conference or committee session and unobserved made his own 
notes. ^^ But more often he would get the notes from memory of two or 
three members and by comparison hammer out a speech or a passage of 
debate. Done in this way the result would be a rather disorganized whole. 
One member would recall certain features of a speech, another would 
recall others, and the not too intelHgent stationer would combine their 

^^ Sanderson, A Compleat History of the Life and Raigne of King Charles (1658), 130. 

" For evidence of a speech carefully polished ofiE after delivery see Forster's Eliot, 2:69-71. Cf. speech 
there given with the speech as found in Mass. MS, £E. 184 verso-85; Grosvenor, IV, 85; Borlase, Stowe 366, 
f. 189. See also Gardiner's comment on this speech. History of England, 1603-42. 6:285 n. 

^* See Lansd. MS 491. f. 138 for a speech of which Eliot says it was "not spoken but intended." And 
on April 30, 1641, D'Ewes protested against "some speeches printed alsoe which I could never remember 
to have been spoken in the House." Harl. 163, f. 120. 

*^ D'Ewes speaking in the Commons of a poet-scrivener who had fathered a speech upon him says: 
"He enformed the partie to whom hee solde it (a stationer) that hee was present at the Conference when it 
was delivered." Harl. 162, f. 376. 



xxxviii INTRODUCTION 

recollections in such a way that there would be overlapping, gaps in the 
thought and logic, and if not gaps an entirely misleading combination of 
the thought. A man would be made to say things that made no sense 
when they were put out by the scrivener but do make sense somewhere 
else. And this, as we have already noted, is the exact character of some 
of the separates. 

But we cannot think that the stationers would have been satisfied 
with such information if by direct dealings with members they could have 
obtained better. Neither can we think that it was only the makers of 
prepared speeches who were eager to have the proceedings of the Com- 
mons noised abroad. In the Admonition of the Speaker in 1588 "against 
the uttering the secrets of this House," the complaint was not only against 
"table-talk" but also "notes in writing." The "notes in writing" were at that 
time probably given out to friends and the person held responsible for the 
leakage of information was not the receiver of the news but the giver. 
Sir Edward Hoby, at the time he made his complaint regarding the false 
reporting of one of his speeches, moved that the offending member be cited 
before the House as had been done in the time of Edward VI and earlier 
in the reign of Elizabeth. 

How much greater the leakage must have been in 1640-42 when there 
was no longer much effort to stop it at the source, when it was the venters 
of the separates who were being called before the House. In 1642 when a 
member had bppn rpqnired to give up his notes Sir Harry Vane, senior. 
Lad turned to D'Ewes and remarked that he could remember when no 
man was allowed to take notes, and wished it now to be forbidden. "Which 
occasioned me, being the principal note-taker in the house, to say . . . 
that the practice existed before hee was born. For I had a journal, 13th 
Elizabeth."82 ^^iSit this journal of D'Ewes was itself a real cause of leak- 
age we have further evidence. In May 1641 he wrote to his wife: "I might 
spare enlarging myselfe this weeke, because I hope this bearer will give 
you a full relacion of all the newes, having as I perceive, taken some privy 
notes of it in a paper, which I hope hee hath enlarged out of my Journal 
of the two last dayes— pass-ages which I lent him this morning to free myselfe 
of his discourse. "*3 It is easy to imagine that the bearer's importunity 
was not mere curiosity. Such notes had a market value. Further evidence 
as to the relation between note-takers and scriveners is perhaps to be 
found in another part of the incident of 1642 referred to above. Sir Walter 
Earle objected that he had seen "some at the lower end [of the House] 
comparing their notes and one of them had gone out."^'* 

*2 D'Ewes quoted by Forster, Grand Remonstrance (London, 1860), 124 n. 
^ Sir Simonds D'Ewes. Autobiography and Correspondence of. 2:265. 
^ D'Ewes, quoted by Forster, Grand Remonstrance. 124 n. 



INTRODUCTION xxxix 

If even at this date there was objection to the carrying on of such a 
practice in the House, it is a safe guess that in the twenties the feeling 
against it must have been greater and the number of offenders very few, 
too few for the stationers to have obtained much information from them. 
But it would be a grave error to assume that all notes in writing must have 
been made while debate was going on. It was a time of close concentra- 
tion and long memories. Many members there were who could easily 
have gone home and written out the speeches almost verbatim and so 
have avoided all detection, if they chose to help the stationers. ^^ Perhaps 
it was from the knowledge of that very fact that the Commons no longer 
attempted to trace the leakage of news to its source. It was probably 
to this kind of notes, gathered from memory that Fuller referred in the 
introduction to his Ephemeris Parliamentaria: "We have compared," 
he writes, "varias lectiones, or rather varias auditiones, the copies as they 
have been taken by several auditors. Sometimes a copy charitably relieved 
another, nor was it long before the defects of the same copie were supplied 
out of that other transcription." 

No part of our search for evidence on this baffling subject proved more 
fruitless than that of finding out the particular persons who furnished the 
stationers with their material. To find a bald statement that such and 
such speeches were taken down by such and such members would be most 
satisfying. Such statements will hardly turn up. Members would have 
been too canny to allow their connection with a scrivener to be gi-u-^n away. 
In going over a large body of parliamentary materials we have discovered 
only one instance where a separate is definitely attributed; in that instance 
only initials, very possibly false, are given. Sir John Eliot's speech of 
June 3, 1628, is the case in point. That speech, which was at least in part 
spontaneous, is said in some of the manuscripts to have been collected by 
"H.W. and T.B. and others. "^^ It is doubtful whether anything more 
concrete will ever be known. 

From the foregoing account it can easily be seen that separates are not 
a reliable source of information, that they are much more apt to be faulty 
than correct. Their inaccuracy was indeed a chief cause of complaint 
against them. The Commons sought to punish the printer of St. John's 
Declaration made at the Conference because it was "full of errors and 
mistakes. "8'' Sir John Culpepper brought in a copy of the Commons's 
Protestation "falselie done."^^ Nalson in quoting a speech of Sir John 

^ A resolution of the Commons on July 22, 1641 is significant: "Ordered that all stationers. i>ri»tcrs. 
and others shall take the names of all such persons which shall bring anything to them *<> oe printed, sold 
or uttered." C.J. 2:220. 

^ Minnesota MS of Parliament of 1628, f. 334. But these hiitials are to be found on many other copies 
of this widely distributed separate. 

" D'Ewes. Harl. 162, f. 203. 

»8 D'Ewes. Harl. 163, f. 136. 



xl INTRODUCTION 

Holland tells us that Holland makes exception to the speech itself as not 
agreeing exactly with the original spoken by him."^^ Sir Edward Deering 
published his speeches himself because one or two of them printed without 
his "connivance" were so inaccurate.^'' On Jime 28, 1641 "Fines moved 
that the reporte hee had made in the House June 17 last past was verie 
falselie printed. "^^ 

In January 1641 a report of a Committee on Scandalous Ministers 
in some way reached a stationer — a well-known stationer — and it led to a 
discussion in the Commons. "It grew at last to a dispute whether the 
Speaker should ask him divers questions how hee came by the copie or 
onlie whether hee had caused it to bee printed or not." D'Ewes, as usual, 
had something to say, "I beleeve from my experience of written materials 
by the falsities of the printed pamphlet that it was transcribed out of a 
twentieth copie. "^^ D'Ewes' comment that Overton had probably printed 
his copy from a twentieth copy tells much. Members had procured copies 
from the clerk and had given copies of these to their friends. The copies 
had been copied and recopied until one manuscript came into the hands 
of a printer. The same thing had happened with that celebrated speech 
of Lord Digby in favor of Strafford. Sir John Evelyn reported from the 
Committee looking into the way in which that speech had got out, that 
Digby had given the speech to "John Moore, a common writer to 
write 20 copies. "^^ After that the speech found its way easily enough 
into Dri«t- 

But the stationers were not only inaccurate, they were often unscru- 
pulous. They furnished bad copies of speeches; they did more than that, 
they manufactured speeches which they sold widely. In a letter to his 
wife early in 1642, Sir Edward Deering writes: "You write of a speech of 
Mr. Hamden's, but no word off itt was sayd heere, nor of that poore phrase 
ascribed to Sir Benjamin Rudyard."^^ In another instance, a printer was 
ordered to be fetched before the Commons for "causing two speeches to 
be printed, pretended to be spoken, one by Mr. Pym, another by Mr. 
Holles."^^ Said Simonds D'Ewes in the Commons: "Much wrong was 
offered of late to several members by pubHshing speeches in ther names 
which they never spake. "^^ Again, "There weere also sundrie speeches 
of private men divulged and some of them copies verie false, but by whom 

^^ Nalson, 2:xi. 

*" Proceedings in Kent in 1640 (Camden Soc), xvii et passim. 

^* Harl. 163, f. 358 verso. The Printing Committee was "to use their best diligence in inquiring, by what 
means tWJc came to the press; and who printed it." C.J. 2:190. 
^^Harl. 162, f. i.>3A. 
'3 D'Ewes. Harl. 163, f. 39o. 

9< Sir Edward Deering to his wife, Jan. 24, 1642. Proceedings in Kent in 1640 (Camden Soc), xliii. 
86 C.J. 2:501. 
« D'Ewes, Harl. 162. f. 376. 



INTRODUCTION xli 

there given out, I know not."^^ Rushworth in his introduction to his 
Historical Collections speaks of "other men's fancies more busie than their 
hands, forging relations . . . publishing speeches as spoken in Par- 
Uament which were never spoken there. "^^ Among the many circulated 
speeches of the Long Parliament, several could be picked out which never 
came from the speakers attributed to them.^^ One of them is described 
to us by John Nalson, who tells of a speech fathered upon Sir Edward 
Hailes: "One Talboy, a busie prating newsmonger, being desirous to ex- 
change a speech he had pick't up for another which he wanted, he went 
to a scrivener at Temple Bar, who then traded in such things, who refusing 
a speech without name to make it currant coin, Talboy stamped on it 
that of Sir Edward Hailes, and for a while it passed as his ; but notice being 
taken of it, Sir Edward Hailes consulted his friends, members of the then 
House of Commons to advise what was fit for him to do, towards vindi- 
cating his honor from the scandal which Talboy had put upon him; but 
Sir Norton Knatchbull, who is yet alive to attest this, and the rest of his 
friends were of opinion, that considering the despicable credit of the fellow 
it was more advisable to take no notice of the imposture. "^"^ 

In summing up, let us briefly answer the question asked at the begin- 
ning, what are separates? They are parliamentary speeches, etc., gathered 
by ignorant, careless and often unscrupulous scriveners in roundabout 
ways and hastily put together for immediate circulation. 

97 Ibid. 

^ Vol. I, iii. 

*9 March 28, 1642 Richard Heren was sent for by the Commons for printing speeches "pretended to be 
spoken" by Pym and Holies. C.J. 2:501. 

C.J. 2:116. April 6, 1641. "Ordered that the Master and Wardens of the Company of Stationers be 
required to attend this House presently; and that forthwith they make search and inquiry after the printer 
and venter of a speech they term Mr. Maynards; the which speech Mr. Maynard absolutely disavows: and 
that they use all diligence in suppressing the said speech." 

i«»2:xi. 



CHAPTER IV 

NEWS-LETTERS 

We have dealt at length with separates. We have now to discuss 
news-letters. Finally we shall treat of the combination of news-letters 
and separates into parliamentary compilations. 

The news-letter must first be defined. It was a daily or weekly narra- 
tive of parliament, a narrative that was sent out in many manuscript copies. 
It contained no evidence as to its author or editor, it gave no information 
that was not of general interest. It was a kind of brief summary of events 
at Westminster that members of the House were glad to enclose with their 
letters to the country. It gave the story of what was happening from day 
to day, and sometimes included picturesque and striking episodes of the 
Commons. 

It is something quite different from the separate. The separate was, 
as we have seen, any speech or parliamentary document existing by itself 
in manuscript copies. The news-letter existed in manuscript copies but 
was a record of daily events. 

It was new only in that it was a record of parliament. There had been 
news-letters before. In Ben Jonson's News from the New World, published 
in 1620, there is a description of a "factor of news": "Gentlemen, I am 
neither printer nor chronologer, but one that otherwise takes pleasure in 
my pen : a factor of news for all the shires of England ; I do write my thousand 
letters a week ordinary, sometimes twelve hundred, and maintain the busi- 
ness at some charge both to hold up my reputation with my own ministers 
in town and my friends of correspondence in the country."^ 

It was in connection with the True Relation for 1629 that we first met 
with the unprinted news-letter. It will be recalled that the True Relation 
for 1629 tiuTis out to be, not a fixed account of that session by anyone in 
particular, but an aggregation of news-letters, with separates attached or 
inserted. The same thing is true of the long manuscript accoimt of the 
Commons sessions for 1628 which we shall later have occasion to examine. 
It is true also of the narrative of the Long ParUament called Diurnall 
Occurrences, By a process of picking these parliamentary manuscript 
compilations to pieces, we arrive at the genus, news-letter. These had been 
gathered into large folio volumes, but they were none the less news-letters. 

The parliamentary news-letter first appears in 1628. We may suspect 
indeed that there had been news-letters in 1626. For we know that in that 
year Sir Benjamin Rudyard was forwarding "remembrances of all that 

1 Gifford, Works of Ben Jonson (1873). 614. 



INTRODUCTION xliii 

had been done in parliament" to his friend Sir Francis Nethersole,^ remem- 
brances that were apparently not of his own composition. 

For the Parliament of 1628 there are not only news-letters but two 
quite separate and distinct series of such letters. 

The first series of news-letters for that year bears a marked resem- 
blance to the True Relation for 1629 which we have already described. 
Indeed we can perhaps say that the account for 1629 was a continuation 
of that for 1628. Both are to be found most frequently in the form of 
manuscript compilations.^ The compilation for 1628 makes up a large 
folio volume which is a long and detailed narrative of the events in the 
House of Commons. The more important speeches are given at great 
length and, as in 1629, are evidently the result of the insertion of sepa- 
rates. As in the case of the True Relation for 1629 the foHo manuscript 
of the debates in 1628 reduces, when the separates are eliminated, 
to a series of news-letters. That it is an aggregation of such letters 
can be proved by the existence of several of the letters* as separate manu- 
scripts. Not nearly so many indeed have we found as for 1629, but enough to 
make it perfectly clear nevertheless that there were periodical news-letters 
for 1628 and that they were of much the same character as those for 1629. 
It is true indeed that there are more speeches and resolutions in the news- 
letters for 1628, there is also a ftdler outline, and an attempt to give some 
summary of nearly all speeches. Probably a single hand was responsi- 
ble for them, instead of two news-writers as in 1629. A second series of 
news-letters for 1628 is to be found in three folio manuscripts, two of 
which are in the Stowe manuscrij3ts at the British Museum^ and one in 
the Earl of Ashburnham's Collections.^ Only one of these manuscripts 
bears evidence of being an original; the others are clearly copies made 
after the originals had been bound up into a folio. The original bears 
the marks of having been issued in parts ; one can still see where each day's 
proceedings had been folded for mailing. At the end of many of the days 
separates are to be found, as has already been described. The bound 
volume of the original bears on the fly-leaf the signature of William Bor- 
lase; he was almost certainly not the author but the owner. For conve- 
nience's sake we have however called this the "Borlase Account" or more 
properly the Borlase set of news-letters. 

- State Pap. Dom. Car. I. xxiii, no. 30. In Rawl. (Bodleian) C. 674 there is a short series of daily reports 
of the Commons which seems to be of the news-letter type. 

' We made no attempt to list all the copies of this compilation for 1628 as we did for the True Relation 
of 1629. It is sufficient to note some of the copies of the most complete form, all of which are identical 
except for copyists' errors. One of them is to be found in the Bodleian (Rawl. A, 78); another in the Petyt 
Collection in the Inner Temple (537:26); a third belongs to the Marquis of Bute; a fourth to the Massachu- 
setts Historical Society; and a fifth is among the Harleian MSS (4771). This last is not complete, wanting 
any narrative after May 26. 

* The debate for April second is to be found in (Bodleian) Rawl. A, 105, f. 46. 

5 366, 367. 

6 Hist. MSS Comn.. VIII, pt. III. 21. 



xliv INTRODUCTION 

Both series of news-letters for 1628 give a full narrative, both confine 
themselves almost entirely to what went on inside the House of Commons. 
The Borlase Account was undoubtedly intended for a more general public 
than the other; it is much more racy and vivid, clearly designed for a more 
popular audience. It is fairly safe to conjecture that the second found 
its sale very largely among the members of the Commons. In tracing 
the sequence of nev/s-letters from parliament to parliament, we are most 
concerned, not with the Borlase but with the first of these two series, 
because it seems to be the beginning of a series which has its culmination 
in the Diurnall Occurrences of the Long Parliament and which probably 
derives from a common brain or a partnership of brains. 

For the Short Parliament there seem to have been two sets of news- 
letters, but it is the first that interests us.^ That set resembles in many 
respects the Diurnall Occurrences of the next Parliament and goes by the 
same names. In one manuscript, at least, the Diurnall Occurrences of the 
first part of the Long Parliament follows on in regular order. ^ It was 
probably a weekly. 

The account for each day is so brief that it could hardly have been sent 
out by itself. The proceedings of seven days would just nicely fit a large 
sheet to be folded. We find this series of news-letters by itself and we find 
parts of it hopelessly interwoven with private news-letters.^ No doubt 
that was one function of the news-letter, to be used by correspondents in 
a hurry. They may partially have filled the place taken by "form letters" 
today. 

The second set of news-letters for this ParUament, if that is what it 
is, needs only to be mentioned in passing. It has no connection with the 
news-letters of 1628, 1629 or with the Diurnall Occurrences of the Long 
Parliament. It has none of the same phrases as the others, is written in 
the first person, and to "you," and is royahst in tone. It may very well 
have been a private narrative that was copied and recopied and so given 
circulation. It is the first of news-letters that shows any leaning to the 
King's side. 

With the Long Parliament we have the set of news-letters known as 
Diurnall Occurrences. It exists today as a printed collection, but it exists 
also in innumerable manuscript copies. ^'^ And its parts, weekly parts, 
exist in as many manuscript copies. ^^ Unlike previous news-letters it dealt 
with both the Commons and Lords, unHke previous news-letters it did 

' state Pap. Dom. Car. I. ccccl. no. 94. Cf. also Add. MSS 36827. ff. 1-87. 

« Harl. 4289, f. 58 et seg. 

^ State Pap. Dom. Car. I. ccccli, no. 57. Cf. also with Rossingliani*s news-letter no. 66, and with 
cccclii, no. 20, neither of which resembles the news-letter in ccccl, no. 94, but seem to be Rossingham's 
own handiwork. 

" Add. MSS 36, 829. See footnote 7, p. Iviii. 

" E.g. Lansd. 510A. f. 193, 199, 305, 616., R. Cholmondeley MSS in Hist. MSS Comn. V, 355. 



INTRODUCTION xlv 

not attempt to give brief abstracts of speeches, but recounted in general 
terms the subjects of debates and the conclusions arrived at. It was in 
every respect a more popidar news-letter, intended less for politicians 
and more for a public now widely interested in a parliament the signifi- 
cance of which it was beginning dimly to apprehend. 

We have one contemporary allusion to it. William Montagu writes 
on December 9, 1641 to Lord Montagu: "There is a Journal of this Par- 
liament come forth from the beginning. I have not time to send it, but 
if you please to have it next week, I shall send it."^^ It was a news- 
letter more devoted to motions and resolutions than any before and it 
left out speeches. The news-letter for the Long Parliament had become 
mechanical as compared with earlier news-letters. Even when it gives 
interesting tidbits, it does so in a matter-of-fact way. It is never unduly 
accurate, gets details wrong, and has a gift for attributing events to the 
wrong day. Like earlier news-letters it is usually impersonal, although 
the word "I" does stray in once or twice. 

It is significant of the relation between the news-letter for the Long 
Parliament and that for the session of 1629 that when the compilations 
of news-letters for 1629 was published in 1641 it took the same title, 
Diurnall Occurrences, and came from the same printer. Is it not probable 
that both came from the same hand or hands? But the nev/s-letter for 
the Short Parliament was much like that for the Long Parliament and the 
news-letter for 1628 like that for 1629. May we not then suspect that the 
whole series — exclusive of course of the Borlase for 1628 and the quite 
separate royalist account for the Short Parliament — came from the same 
hand or hands? 

The news-letter had then in the course of less than a score of years 
become a regtdar feature in connection with parliament. It satisfied a 
real demand.^' It was turned out regtdarly. And, barring the Borlase 
series for 1628 and the Royalist account for the Short Parliament, it has 
a fairly regular character. 

That such a news-letter was issued from week to week during the ses- 
sions of parliament implies more organized effort than does the produc- 
tion of separates. Each of these, being complete in itself, gave no promise 
of more to follow. Not so the daily record of events; to write that for one 
day implied a purpose to continue for the whole session. The daily record 
reveals also a greater knowledge of what was going on in the House. No 
doubt it was this part of the True Relation, rather than the compilation 
as a whole, that led Bruce to conclude that it came from "some person who 

^ Bucdeuch and Queensberry MSS at Montagu House, 1:288-89. 

^^ John Cleveland alludes to the Diurnal — of v/hich the parliamentary Diurnal was the earliest form: 
"The country carrier when he buys it for the vicar ..." John Cleveland's Works (1687), 84. It is to 
be found in many country houses. Hist. MSS Comn. I, 54.. V 355; Melbourne MSS II. 310. Add. MSS 
36,829. 



xlvi INTRODUCTION 

had access to pectdiar sources of information,"" meaning perhaps by 
"pecuHar" what we would term "official," i.e. to the clerk. 

If this was Bruce's meaning, he took much the same attitude as other 
scholars who have sought to account for the origin of the news-letters. 
One has claimed that they came directly from the clerk or assistant clerk, 
another that although they came from an outside source they went through 
some process of licensing at the hands of the clerk of one or the other House. 
We beheve that this is a mistaken opinion arrived at, undoubtedly, because 
the news-letter was studied only as it appears in the finished product, 
and not at all in its development. Yet it makes it necessary for us to take 
up the evidence for and against this theory before we can clear the ground 
for our own theory that the news-letters have exactly the same origin as 
the separates, i.e. were made by the stationers, and that the stationers 
got their information for the news-letter much as they got it for separates. 

Nothing is more natural than to suspect that the news-letters derived 
from the clerk or assistant clerks of the House of Commons. Alfred J. 
Horwood in one of the earlier records of the Historical Manuscripts Com- 
mission assures us that some news-letters of the reign of Charles II to be 
found among the collections of J. B. Mostyn give proof that they came 
in part from the office of the clerk. Horwood describes a "newsman" who 
compiled the news-letter, copies of which he sent to various customers 
throughout the country. "For parliamentary news he had the (covert) 
assistance of the Clerks of Parliament, who furnished copies of or extracts 
from the minutes of proceedings in the Houses of Parliament. "^^ It appears 
from one of the papers in the Mostyn Collection that a number of coffee- 
house keepers were before the House of Commons and the Clerk of the 
Commons was forbidden to furnish copies of the minutes to be read in 
the coffee-houses. 

It is qtiite possible that in the reign of Charles II the makers of news- 
letters did get information from the office of the Clerk of the Commons, 
though we should like to see the proof in detail. That the news-letters 
we have been talking about, those for 1628, for 1629, for the Short and 
Long Parhaments, had any connection with the Clerk of the Commons, 
it is impossible to prove and almost as impossible to believe. 

There is just one bit of comparison that at first blush seemed to point 
towards a connection between the clerk's office and the news-letters. John 
Rushworth's Historical Collections in its account of the Long Parliament 
has passages that agree verbally with those to be found in the series of 

^* Archaeologia 38:237-45. 

« Hist. MSS Comn. I, 44. 

On March, 24, 1680/81 in a discussion in the Commons of the getting out of news, Mr. Boscawen said: 
"But your Journal-Books are open, and copies of yovir votes in every Coffee House." Grey's Debates 
(1763) 8:293. 



INTRODUCTION xlvii 

news-letters for that Parliament known as Diurnall Occurrences.'^^ But 
Rushworth was assistant clerk of the House of Commons. And what is 
more, we know that he did use, in his Collections, materials he found in 
the clerk's office. What more natural than to suppose that those materials 
which are the same as those in Diurnall Occurrences were part of Rushworth's 
record as assistant clerk ? Rushworth could not with safety have had any 
dealings with the makers of Diurnall Occurrences. 

How far the makers of Diurnall Occurrences were from parliamentary 
approval is apparent, if we allow ourselves to assume what seems very prob- 
able, that the Diurnall Occurrences was put together by the same persons 
who put together Speeches and Passages.^'' The latter book contains the 
famous speech of Digby against the Earl of Strafford, a speech which 
the Commons had ordered to be burnt by the common hangman^ ^ and were 
doing everything they could to suppress. Two members of the Commons, 
Sir Lewis Dive and John More, had been voted deHnquents by the Com- 
mons for publishing and printing this speech. ^^ On nothing were the 
Commons more set than on undoing Digby's work. Neither Rushworth 
nor any other Clerk of the Commons would have ventured to help pub- 
lishers who were obviously running counter to the wishes of the Commons.^'' 

The resemblances between Rushworth's Historical Collections and 
Diurnall Occurrences are easily enough explained. Rushworth used not only 
official documents, he used everything that came to his hand. What he 
thought he might require he went and took, when it came to gathering 
his great historical compendium. There were many copies to be had of 
the well-known news-letter, Diurnall Occurrences, and Rushworth dumped 
its information into his Collections along with many other manuscript 
and printed materials. 

There is a more general reason, however, and a much stronger one 
for believing that the news-letters were never taken from the clerk's office. 
In no single case do the news-letters we have examined show resemblance 
verbal or otherwise to the Commons Journals. Had they both originated 
in the same way, it is unthinkable that resemblances would not turn up. 
There is no blinking this fact which has been carefully verified at many 
points. However careful the clerk might have been to conceal his part 

'^ E.g. C/. Rushworth (March 4, 1640/41) 4:203 with Diurnall Occurrences, 46, and Rushworth (June 29, • 
1641) 4:303 with Diurnall Occurrences, 175. 

''' They are both printed by WiUiam Cooke, Diurnall Occurrences right after Speeches and Passages, 
and Diurnall Occurrences gives frequent cross-references to the sister pubhcation (See D. O. 1, 2, 4, 8, 11, 
12, 15, etc.) Furthermore Diurnall Occurrences inserts speeches left out by Speeches and Passages. The 
paper and the press form are the same. 

18 C.J. 2:209. 

^^ Ibid. Cf. also D'Ewes. Harl. 163. f. 13. 288, 396 verso., Sloane MSS 1467, f. 71 verso., Somers Tracts 
(1809-13), 4:234. 

2" That Rushworth did afterwards insert this speech in his Collections (4:225-28), when he was no longer 
assistant clerk and when the Long Parliament was a thing of the past, has no significance. 



xlviii INTRODUCTION 

in giving out speeches or narratives of proceedings, he cotild not have 
been skilful enough completely to cover his tracks. He could not through 
four several sessions of parliament have made two separate accounts that 
showed no resemblance to one another save that they dealt with the same 
facts. Had he been clever enough always to use different words, he would 
have betrayed himself in the enumeration of points or in the order of argu- 
ment. Here and there the Commons Journals and the various parliamen- 
tary manuscripts would have had tell-tale marks of common origin. Such 
evidence, though sought long and eagerly, is not to be found. Neither the 
clerk, nor anyone connected with him, was responsible for the news- 
letters. 

J. B. Williams, in his History of English Journalism, a work to the 
research of which we owe much and to which all students of seventeenth 
century England must acknowledge their indebtedness, makes the state- 
ment that "these 'diumalls' . . . went through some process of licensing 
at the hands of the clerks of one or the other House, whose names frequently 
appear at the end or beginning. "^^ In a more recent treatment of the 
same subject he says that "in November, 1641, Parliament encroached 
upon the royal prerogative by permitting Diumalls of its proceedings 
(to which other news was added) to be published under the imprimatur 
of its clerks. "2^ This permission is not to be found in the Commons Joiir- 
nal for November, 1641. Yet it must have come at that time or soon 
after, for Diurnall Occurrences for January, 1642 by its more authorita- 
tive tone gives some slight indication that it was not brought out surrep- 
titiously. It was certainly before March of that year, for on the 28th of 
that month the Commons resolved "that what person soever shall print [or] 
. . . sell any Act or Passages of this House, under the name of a Diurnal 
or otherwise, without the particular license of this House, shall be reputed 
a high Contemner and Breaker of the Privilege of Parliament. "^^ And 
from 1643 onward certain Diumals bear regularly either the authorization 
from Stationers Hall, which was of course under the ever watchful eye of 
Parliament, or of Gilbert Mabbott or some other sub-clerk of the Commons. 
There can be no doubt that licensing began early, but there is doubt of 
its being general, as Williams indicates in his further statement that "the 
result of the permission was that, in a week or two, as many as fifteen 
Diumalls . . . appeared every Monday. "^^ The Commons resolution, 
in March, 1642, suggests rather that most of the Diumals were appearing 
without license. And that is borne out by the statement in the first niun- 
ber of A Perfect Diurnall of Some Passages in Parliament, June 2 6- July 3, 

^ History of English Journalism (1908), 36. 

22 Cambridge History of English Literature 7 (1911), 392. 

23 C.J. 2:501. 

2* Cambridge History of English Literature 7:392. 



INTRODUCTION xlix 

1643. We find there: "One thing (to the courteous Reader) is thought fit 
in this first weeks Intelligence to be premised, that however you have 
formerly been abused with many false and truthless Informations, through 
the publishing in print of sundry Fictions, unlicensed Diumals and such 
like Passages to the great scandall of the Parliament and prejudice of the 
Kingdom. The Parliament having since pleased to publish an Order for 
prevention of such irregular Printing and to settle a course that nothing 
be hereafter printed without licence on good authority you may hence forth 
expect from hereafter to be informed only of such things as are of Credit 
and of sure Part of the proceedings of one of both Houses of Parliament 
fit to be divulged. "2^ 

From this evidence we hope it is plain that Diumals did not have their 
beginning as a result of permission from the Commons, but that they were 
something already flourishing, which the Commons tried to control and curb, 
when, with war approaching, they felt it necessary to take over the news. 
Then it became too important a thing to be left to the scriveners aroimd 
Westminster; it needed to be handled wisely. Up to 1642 their hands 
were against the purveyors of news. However much individual members 
of parliament may have welcomed the news-letter as a ready means of in- 
forming their country friends, official Westminster was opposed to it and 
would have tolerated no connection, even underhanded, between its 
servants, the clerk and his assistants, and the ready writers of diurnal nar- 
ratives. As late as November 18, 1641, the Commons ordered their Print- 
ing Committee to "suppress the Printing or Venting in manuscript, the 
diurnal Occurrences of Parliament."-^ 

Having dealt with the theory that the clerks of the House of Commons 
were in any way implicated in the production of the news-letter, we are 
now ready to turn to our own theory that news-letters have the same origin 
as the separates, that they came from the scriveners and stationers. It is 
in the first place a natural presumption in favor of such a theory that in the 
contemporary manuscripts news-letters and separates are to be found inex- 
tricably mixed. The compilation for 1628, the True Relation for 1629, 
are, as we have seen, combinations of news-letters and separates. Many 
manuscripts exist in which a few separates are joined with a news-letter 
tro wo. 

Similar evidence is the close connection between the printed Diurnall 
Occurrences of 1641 and the book of separates printed under the title of 
Speeches and Passages. Not only were they brought out by the same 
printer but there are to be found, as we have noticed, cross-references 
from the Diurnall Occmrences to the "Book of Speeches."" 

25 E. 249. 
2« C.J. 2:319. 

-' See above p. xlvii, n. 17. 



1 INTRODUCTION 

But the character of the news-letters affords even better proof of their 
origin. These news-letters were not merely the record of actions, resolu- 
tions, etc., but of dramatic and amusing incidents in parliament as well. 
With the Long Parliament, events in the Upper House were sometimes 
briefly described. The news-letters were prepared with an eye to a read- 
ing public. They were prepared by people who had none too much accu- 
rate information. The makers of them fall into errors about events, 
for example in the trial of the Earl of Strafford,^^ errors that could not have 
been made by those closely in touch with affairs. The makers show that 
they understood almost nothing about parliamentary procedure or the 
"fine shades" of parliament. They paid little attention to the order of 
thought or even to the order of speeches. This internal evidence, then, 
would lead us to suspect that the news-letters were prepared by scriveners 
and stationers. When we reach the Long ParHament, we have some positive 
clues as to the authorship of the news-letters for that parliament, and, if 
for that parliament, in all probability for the preceding parliaments for 
which news-letters were issued. There are two pamphlets that make very 
clear the origin of the set of news-letters for the Long Parliament known as 
Dturnall Occurrences and that certainly imply the same origin for the earlier 
news-letters. We must quote somewhat fully first from .4 Presse-full of 
Pamphlets: "Here is nothing more congruent to the nourishment of division 
in a State or Commonwealth, then a diversity of Rumours mixt with Falsity 
and Scandalisms; nothing more prejudicial to a Kingdome, then to have the 
divisions thereof made known to an enemy; nothing more infamoug to 
Nobility and Gentility than abusive Pamphlets, and scurrilous descriptions 
of the severall dispositions of Honourable and worthy persons ; nothing more 
disgraceful to the Proceedings of any Court of Judicature then to have 
the same spread over the world in unseemly and obnoxious Papers. Secrecy 
in the Agitation of great Affairs hath always bin accompted good Policy 
in the alteration of the Government of a State. My intentions in this 
Paper, is no otherwise but to describe the abuse of Printing . . , 
abusing . . . even the Proceedings of the High Court of Parliament . . . 
Never so much printing of Parliamentary Proceedings, as hath bin during 
the sitting of this most wise, happy, and renowned one."^^ The writer 
then becomes more concrete. "The first inventors of the Art of Printing 
Pamphlets in this last remarkable year of printing was Clerks (scriveners) 
or a Clerk, as it is supposed, who being but a single man, could not be 
contented to live of 15s the week, which he might gain by writing the 

^ We cannot stop here to point out the blunders of Diurnall Occurrences in respect to Strafford's trial. 
Those mistakes will be fully dealt with in the critical edition of D'Ewes' Diary, the first part soon to be 
published. 

^* E. 142 (9). We owe to J. B. Williams the first citation of these pamphlets, of which, however, we have 
made other and fvirther use. 



INTRODUCTION H 

true proceedings in Parliament, and till Printing was tinquestionable, 
and other Passages concerning the same which Gentlemen of good worth 
delighted in." We stop in the quotation here to notice that the word 
"writing" is to be emphasized. The Proceedings in Parliament were being 
written by stationers before it was safe to print them. The pamphleteer 
goes on: "But in hope of more gain to himself by undoing of others, put 
the first copy of the Diurnall Occurrences that was printed to a Printer, 
and then came all other things true and false to the Presse; this was the 
first step to the ruinating of the tribe of clerks." The anonymous writer 
of this pamphlet goes on to sketch the later course of the scriveners or 
stationers. They turned, he says, to writing what happened in foreign 
countries, in Ireland, France, Spain, Italy, Denmark, Portugal, and part 
of Holland, but now he says, "the occupations have turned the Stream 
into another Channell; and come again to the Proceedings of Parliament 
. . . Besides they have a comer in their Ventners to breed Conferences, 
Speeches, Petitions, Declarations," etc. 

The pamphleteer seems to imply that this stationer had been getting 
out parliamentary proceedings for a long time, then gave it up to tell of 
foreign affairs and resumed it recently, when he also took up speeches, 
reports of conferences, etc. If this is what the pamphleteer really means, 
he would imply that this stationer wrote the news-letters for the earlier 
parliaments, those we have talked about for 1628 and 1629, that then 
during the thirties he turned to foreign affairs — there were many corantoes 
of foreign affairs during that time — and then, on the opening of the Long 
Parliament resumed the writing of news-letters until printing was allowed 
and then gave Diurnall Occurrences to the printer. Is such an interpre- 
tation inferring too much? Possibly. But another pamphleteer seems 
to imply the same thing. The author of a Fresh Whip for all Scandalous 
Lyers writes: "He was once a stationer till he kept his little hole in West- 
minster where he indeed began his trade of inditing or framing and so rose 
at last to the stile of a 'diurnal writer.' I must confess at his first begin- 
ning to write he was very industrious and would labor for the best intelli- 
gence as his large volumes do testify, but when he found the sweetness 
of it and how easily he could come by his intelligence he fell to his sports 
and pastimes. "^"^ 

Surely this pamphleteer implies that one man was the parliamentary 
diurnal maker from the beginning on. "His large volumes" could fit only 
the man who made the news-letters from 1628 on. And furthermore the 
steady degeneration in the character of his news fits in perfectly. The 
news-letters for 1628 were better than those for 1629, both were better 
than those for the Long Parliament. Both pamphleteers make it clear 

30 E. 406 (10). 



lii INTRODUCTION 

that it was a stationer who got out the proceedings for the Long 
ParHament called Diurnall Occurrences, that one man had in hand the 
task of preparing a regular parliamentary news-letter. And both 
pamphleteers give us reason to suspect that the same man got out the 
regular series of news-letters which begin with the Parliament of 1628 and 
go on to the Long ParHament. We say "regular," because obviously the 
Borlase news-letters as well as the second set of news-letters for the Short 
Parliament are of a different origin. 

John Cleveland in his Accoimt of a London Diurnal may well be quoted. 
"A Diurnal is a puny Chronicle, scarce pin-feathered with the wings of 
Time. It is a History in sippets; the English Iliads in a nutshel. The 
apocryphal Parliament's Book of Maccabees in single sheets ... It 
begins usually with an Ordinance, which is a law still-bom. "^^ Cleveland's 
allusion to single sheets is interesting. When we find separate news-letters 
we find them on single sheets, folded or twice folded and addressed on the 
back, usually to someone in the country. 

Cleveland says in another place of the Diurnal Maker: "Such an His- 
torian would hardly pass muster with a Scotch Stationer, in a Sieve-ftill 
of Ballads and godly Books . . . Writing is a disease in him, and holds 
like a Quotidian; so 'tis his infirmity that makes him an author. "'^ It is 
evident enough that the man who put together the proceedings of parlia- 
ment was a man of no position and was not taken seriously. 

Williams believes that he is able to identify this stationer as one Samuel 
Pecke.^^ An examination of the original pamphlets which Williams quotes 
for his conclusion does not verify it. It only establishes the fact that 
Pecke was a stationer who wrote parliamentary proceedings.^* Perhaps 
Williams' proof comes from another source which he has not cited at this 
point. It matters little who wrote the news-letters. The point is that 
they were made by stationers, made to sell, made by people without first- 
hand and intelligently gathered information. 

This discussion of the origin of separates and news-letters has neces- 
sarily been of such an argumentative character that it has not been possi- 
ble at the same time clearly to present the evolution of the business of 
reporting parliamentary news in a proper chronological sequence. At the 
risk of some repetition, and by way of summing up, we shall trace that 
evolution. 

It will be recalled that the leakage of parliamentary news appears to 
have begun soon after the beginning of a party in opposition to the King, 

81 Works. 83. 84. 
32 Ibid., 79. 80. 

3' History of English Journalism, 37. 

^ We do know that in February 1643 he was committed for printing and publishing a book entitled 
A Continuation of Passages for the last Week. Hist. MSS Comn. V, 70. But is the author of the Contin- 
uation of Passages the same as that of Diurnall Occurrences? 



INTRODUCTION liii 

that is during the reign of Elizab^^A-At that time we find the dissemi- 
nation of set speeches and also o^^^^ents of information in talk and 
written notes. It was in a time wE^n .people in the country could receive 
only such news as their friends at Westminster took time to write them. 
With the rise of this party of opposition the demand for news increased 
and the correspondence of the members of parliament must have become 
a real burden. Scriveners were probably employed to copy speeches in 
the possession of members, and then one of these, more enterprising than 
the rest, must have conceived the idea of getting hold of such speeches 
himself, making copies in advance and offering them for sale. Such prompt- 
ness would please the members, who would soon give up the older method. 

Out of this production of separates by the scriveners there developed 
a particular kind of separate of which we have not spoken yet and the 
interest in which is chiefly that it forms a connecting link between the 
separate and the news-letter. This separate consists of a group of short 
speeches all bearing on the same subject and showing by its title that the 
group made up a single separate. A good example of such a separate is 
to be found in Ephemeris Parliamentaria under the title Debates concern- 
ing the Kings propositions.^^ In this effort to send out as separates a group 
of speeches we can detect the beginning of the news-letter. There has 
been an advance in the business of preparing information for the public. 
No doubt the news was obtained in the same way, through the conversa- 
tion or notes of private members. There is no reason to suppose that the 
fully evolved news-letter was drawn from or depended upon more sources 
of intelligence. The stationers were merely becoming more skilful in 
maldng use of what they found out and in presenting it to the public. 

At each step in the advance of the stationer's art we can see his pro- 
duction supplanting that of the private member. The dawn of the sepa- 
rates marks the abridgement of both letters and private diaries. We have 
already seen to what extent those who kept diaries inserted the set speeches 
instead of taking notes. And, on the other hand, as we shall see in dis- 
cussing compilations, there was a need felt by those who were depending 
entirely upon what separates they could obtain for a permanent record 
of the proceedings of parliament. It was met at first by individuals attempt- 
ing to link up the separates themselves; this was what Walter Yonge did. 
The enterprising stationer could not long remain blind to this new demand.^^ 
The news-letter was a natural development from the separate. 

35 138-39. 

^ In A Perfect Diurnall of Passages in the late Memorable Parliament begun the 13 of April 1640, a unique 
news-letter published in 1649 at the end of a newspaper of that year and obviously printed from a manu- 
script news-letter of the Short Parliament, the anonymous editor says: "This worke (as in part already 
promised) we have undertaken at the request and importunity of some Gentlemen to reduce to memory 
the passages of things both before and since the beginnings of late wars, which have not hitherto been so 
exactly committed to the publique." 



liv INTRODUCTION 

Diurnall Occurrences marks the culmination in the development of 
news-letters. But it has an even greater importance, as J. B. Williams 
has pointed out in his History of English Journalism, in its relation to 
domestic newspapers. This is not the time or place to deal with the origin 
of newspapers, but we hope at a futtu-e time to discuss at some length 
the relation of the parhamentary news-letter to the first English newspapers 
and to show that this was an important connection. We have seen that 
Diurnall Occurrences in print was the successor of Diurnall Occurrences 
in manuscript news-letter. But Diurnall Occurrences in print was the pred- 
ecessor of other weeklies which gave parliamentary news and gradually 
branched out into giving general news. 

If this be true, the statements we have made as to the development 
of the unprinted news-letter are important in the history of the English 
newspaper. We have noticed that the Diurnall Occurrences was not only 
the first of domestic newspapers but the last in a series of parliamentary 
news-letters, news-letters that had been issued since 1628. These news- 
letters, then, unprinted as serials until 1642, not printed at all until 1641, 
go back nearly as far as the corantoes. May one not say that they are 
almost as significant in the origin of English journalism as the corantoes? 
May one possibly say that the English newspaper has one of its origins 
in the custom, in use as early as 1628, of sending out resumes of parlia- 
mentary news in manuscript form? 

One would need to know more about the other news-letters that were 
sent out, the news-letters for example that Ben Jonson tells us of in the 
passage already cited. So few such news-letters have been preserved that 
one might well question their periodicity. They constitute a subject, 
however, which may well be studied by the historian of the early newspaper. 
In the meantime we may suspect that, if the corantoes were the direct an- 
cestors, the parliamentary news-letters were the collateral ancestors of the 
English newspaper. 

What is the relation of this account to what Williams has to say in 
his writings on English joumaHsm? Williams devotes himself wholly to 
the early newspaper. We have attempted to tell the history of the earlier 
parliamentary news-letter, its predecessor, to tell it not as part of the his- 
tory of the newspaper, — although it is really that — but as part of the account 
and criticism of parliamentary sources for the early Stuart period. Williams 
tells us of the printed Diurnall Occurrences as the first of domestic news- 
papers, of those papers which succeeded the corantoes. He was dealing 
only with printed materials, and he did not indicate that the first of news- 
papers was issued as a news-letter before it was printed, that it was the 
last in a series of parliamentary news-letters that had been issued for 
several parliaments, that the people who were later to put out the first 
newspapers had been busy earlier in putting out news-letters of much 



INTRODUCTION Iv 

the same sort. It has been the task of this chapter to trace the growth 
and estimate the importance and value of the parliamentary news-letter. 
In order to do that it has been necessary to take apart the anonymous 
and mysterious parliamentary compilations to be found in so many folios 
in the British Museum and in private repositories, compilations which 
in manuscript, and occasionally'- in later printed editions, have been a stand- 
ard source, and to resolve them into their parts, to show that they were 
merely accretions of news-letters and separates, put out by irrespon- 
sible stationers, put out regularly for several years before those stationers 
embarked upon the newspaper business. 

To the historian the matter is important in determining the real value 
of those compilations. They are the sum total of news-letters, nothing 
more. They have of course their real value, but must never be relied upon 
too implicitly. They must not be treated as rare and important parlia- 
mentary manuscripts, but as the hurried work of newsmongers. 



CHAPTER V 
PARLIAMENTARY COMPILATIONS 

Separates were too much esteemed to be thrown away. People inter- 
ested in parliament were likely to preserve sets of them and at length to 
bind them into a folio volume of manuscripts for a single session or for 
several sessions of parliament. They were likely, too, to gather news-letters 
and sometimes to combine the separates and news-letters for a parliament. 
Such a volume we may call a Parliamentary Collection. There are scores 
of them in the British Museum. 

Such Parliamentary Collections were no doubt in demand, were fre- 
quently loaned and often copied by the borrower. The scriveners and sta- 
tioners who produced the parts out of which the collection had grown 
probably began to realise that they could produce the wholes. When they 
did so, when they gathered separates and news-letters into a consecutive 
account of a session of parliament or of the Commons, when they copied and 
recopied this consecutive account and sold it, it became a kind of standard 
account. Such a product we may call a Parliamentary Compilation. Parlia- 
mentary Compilations exist in many copies in the British Museum and in 
country houses all over England. 

It is possibly worth while to give a brief history of these collections 
and compilations. That history is at best no more than an imperfect 
sketch. To ransack all the parliamentary collections in the British Museum 
and in coimtry houses merely to find out the different ways at different 
times in which separates and news-letters were combined would be a dreary 
task and one that would not yield returns commensurate with the efifort. 
Such a narrative as we here present is based solely upon the information 
picked up in connection with the examination of separates and news-letters 
as forms of parliamentary sources. 

There are Parliamentary Collections for the parliaments of Elizabeth, 
brief ones, but it may be doubted whether they were made at the time or 
by eighteenth-century antiquarians. In Harleian manuscript 2185 there 
is a group of speeches, mostly those of the Lord Keeper and of the Speaker. 
In the same volume are the titles of such bills as were rejected and a short 
journal of a few days in Elizabeth's first parliament. In Harleian manu- 
script 6846 there is another set of speeches, not only those of the Lord 
Keeper, but many by Sir Walter Mildmay. This collection was however 
probably made by Sir Robert Cotton more than a half century afterwards. 
We may be sru-e that had there been such things as real Parliamentary 
Collections of any size in Elizabeth's reign Sir Simonds D'Ewes would 
have had his hands on them. He used only the Commons Journals, private 
diaries and such separates as he himself could gather in. 



INTRODUCTION Ivii 

For the session of 1606 there is to be found in Harleian manuscript 
6842 a group of speeches on the union with Scotland. They are all written 
in a single hand that belongs to a later period, hence giving no clue as to 
when the collection was made. But it seems probable that it was one of 
Humphrey Wanley's accumulations in the eighteenth century. For the 
session of 1610 we are on surer ground. Harleian manuscript 777 is a 
group of separates, petitions, etc., written in a single hand. We know also 
of a group of separates which an Englishman abroad circulated among 
his friends.^ For the ParHament of 1614 we know of no collection, except 
the verj^ specialized one of "His Majesties speeches in Parliament pro- 
nounced at sundry times Anno 1614."' For the Parliament of 1620-21 there 
is a journal written much as the clerk of the time wrote his account, with 
a record of acts, readings, and careful brief abstracts of speeches. So much 
is this like a Journal of the Commons that it has been so classified in the 
British Museimi and is to be found there as Harleian manuscripts 7207- 
7208, two thick folios giving quite as full an account of that interesting 
parliament as does Sir Edward Nicholas's well-known Debates and Pro- 
ceedings. Another copy of this manuscript is to be found among the Petyt 
manuscripts in the Inner Temple. Still another copy or part of it, the 
part devoted to debates on freedom of speech, is to be found in Lansdowne 
manuscript 514. Its character, so much more finished than the ordinary 
private diary, and the multiplicity of the copies, almost give ground for 
classifying it as a compilation. Yet it was obviously the work of one man, 
a man who sympathized strongly with the parliamentary party, and who 
occasionally records his own comings and goings and committee assign- 
ments. We shall not be far wrong if we call it a private diary written to 
distribute.^ Whether the stationers did the distributing we cannot say. 
For the session beginning in June, 1625, that adjoiuned to Oxford in August, 
there are partial collections.* 

There are several parliamentary collections for 1626, but nothing that 
could be called a compilation. There is Walter Yonge's considerable 
volume of separates interspersed with what is probably his own brief 
narrative of events, largely a comment. In Harleian manuscript 161 
there are some of the same separates and some others. Still another 
collection of separates is to be found in Rawlinson manuscript C. 674. 
Moreover it is evident that the eighteenth century compiler of the old 
Parliamentary History used a group of separates different from any of 
these mentioned. With the session of 1628 we have both Parliamentary 

1 A Collection for 1610 is to be found in Cottonian MSS 569, Titus. F. IV. 14. S. 112-33. 

2 Ashmolean MSS (Bodleian) 800, £E. 115-25. 

' There is a short collection of parliamentary materials for this session in Rawl. MSS (Bodleian) B. 151. 
*Harl. MSS 5007., Sloane MSS 1710, ff. 279-305 verso. Several other collections catalogued we have 
not seen. 



Iviii INTRODUCTION 

Collections and Compilations. The collection of legal arguments and of 
speeches which is to be found in print as Thomas Fuller's Ephemeris Par- 
Uamentaria exists in many contemporary manuscripts, with considerable 
differences of course as to the speeches inserted. In other words, many 
people saved their separates, saved much the same separates, and bound 
them together. 

But there is something different. There is a real Parliamentary Com- 
pilation for this session. There is a standard consecutive accoimt follow- 
ing the course of events from day to day, putting the whole together, a 
complete unified narrative of the Commons. Part of one copy is in the 
Museum, another copy found its way probably with the Pilgrims to Massa- 
chusetts and is in the Massachusetts Historical Society's library, a third 
copy is in the Inner Temple, and a fourth, signed by a parliamentary 
character of the time, is in the Bodleian. Other copies are to be found in 
private collections. 

The True Relation was of course the Parliamentary Compilation for 
1629- We need not discuss it again save to say that it was a most per- 
fect compilation in this respect that it put together two sets of news-letters 
as well as the separates. 

For the Short Parliament there is one collection in the British Museum 
that seems to be a genuine compilation, made probably by the same hands 
that made the Diurnall Occurrences for the Long Parliament.^ 

With the Long Parliament the work of compilation has become more 
important than ever before. There was more demand for manuscript 
records. The scriveners and stationers found it worth while to split the 
compilations which they would naturally have made into two collections. 
They gathered the separates into one foUo, which was widely distributed 
in manuscript copies and eventually printed as Speeches and Passages. 
They gathered the news-letters into another standard collection which 
was known as Diurnall Occurrences, or sometimes as the Heads of the 
Proceedings. There are scores of copies of this manuscript folio to be found 
today.^ Near the end of the year 1641 this folio was also printed. But 
tliere were many variants of these two standard collections, indeed there 
is an almost infinite variety that is far from pleasing to the student. One 
folio in the British Museimi has many additional sentences and even addi- 
tional paragraphs not to be found in the regular Diurnall Occurrences J 

* See footnotes 8 and 9 on page xHv in the chapter on news-letters, paragraph dealing with the Short 
Parliament. 

® No doubt private collectors of news-letters for the Long Parliament compiled some of the sets of news- 
letters themselves. Not all the collections of Diurnall Occurrences for the first year of that parliament 
were made by scriveners and stationers. 

^ Add. MSS 33. 468. f. 33-34. See also Add. MSS 36. 829., Sloane MSS 3317.. Add. MSS 6521. 



INTRODUCTION lix 

Other collections appear to be a combination of the standard set of news- 
letters with other and quite different news-letters,"* often with the first 
person inserted, as if the sender were fusing into one narrative the stand- 
ard news-letter and his own story. 

We do not know of such compilations after 1641. The Long Parlia- 
ment had been much distressed by the activities of the stationers in its 
first year and eventually took pains to get the reporting of news under 
its control. The men who managed the Long Parliament grasped fully 
the necessity of using the news as a means of propaganda, they were 
little behind our modem politicians in that respect. Separates and news- 
letters disappear and in their place are authorized speeches printed with 
the imprimatur of the clerk and Parliamentary Proceedings issued as a 
semi-official publication, the forerunner of Mr. George Creel's Bulletin. 

Today the collections and compilations for James I and Charles I are 
widely distributed in Britain, particularly among the descendants of the 
old "Country Party," most of them Tory peers today. The descendants 
of Eliot, Digges, Knightley, Grosvenor, Pym, etc., possess many Parlia- 
mentary Collections and Compilations and are generous in giving access 
to historians. Most of these manuscripts, however, are but variant texts 
in seventeenth-century writing of the separates and news-letters we have 
been discussing. 

As source material the compilations are of even less value than their 
component parts. There has been more chance for errors to creep in, errors 
in order, in phrase and word. As we have indicated in the description of 
the True Relation for 1629 the greatest inaccuracy is in respect to the order 
of speeches and events recorded. This was due of course almost alto- 
gether to the compilers. The work of compiling was undoubtedly done 
after the close of the session. Whether immediately after or whether 
there was a lapse of months or even years, it is impossible to say. The 
effect on the compilation of the lapse of time would be inconsiderable, for 
it was done by outsiders who at no time had the additional information 
necessary for an intelligent organization of the materials at their hand. 
Order with them was largely a matter of guess work; it was hardly to be 
expected that they would all guess ahke. 

But the compilations erred in more than order. Copying was done 
by careless hands who left out words, lines, and paragraphs, who changed 
phrases and sentences. The differences between different manuscripts of 
the same compilation are many and important. 

The mistakes of the stationers are likely to lead the historian astray. 
A scrivener who failed to note in the margin the name of the speaker in 

8 E. g. Sloane MSS 1467. 



Ix INTRODUCTION 

the Commons who followed Sir Thomas Wentworth one day in 1628 made 
Wentworth talk in a fashion strangely royalist for him at that time. Here, 
said Gardiner, is where Wentworth began to go over to the King. It was 
an easy mistake and Gardiner deserves Httle blame. 

The Parliamentary Compilations written in contemporary hand, giving 
a full narrative, have hitherto been used as standard accounts. Once in 
a long while Gardiner foimd something in them inconsistent with the 
Commons Journals, but otherwise was not critical of them. We cannot of 
course eliminate them from our sources, but we must be much more cau- 
tious in depending upon them. 



CHAPTER VI 
PRIVATE DIARIES 

From the accounts of anonymous scriveners we turn to private diaries. 
The men of 1629 were fortunate when the}^ had Sir Edward Nicholas and 
Sir Richard Grosvenor to record their speeches for posterity. Even Lowther 
is useful in filling in gaps in thought and sequence. 

The notes which Sir Edward Nicholas took of the session of the Com- 
mons in 1629 were those of a member of the Court Party. From his first 
entry into parliament in 1620, and even before that, he had been a servant 
of the Court. At that time he was already Secretary to the Lord Warden 
and Admiral of the Cinque Ports. In 1624 he became Secretary to the 
Lord High Admiral of England, and performed much of the business of 
that office, which was left to him by Buckingham. In 1625 he was promoted 
to the office of Secretary of the Admiralty and in the next year became 
clerk extraordinary to the Privy Council. As member of the House 
of Commons, this clear-headed man of business, who might have taken 
an important part in the parliamentary affairs, chose not to make speeches, 
or play any public role. It is a good guess that he was chiefly a scout for 
the government. The Record Office contains speeches at various times 
by various members written out in Nicholas's hand, or written in other 
hands with corrections in that of Nicholas. From his admission to the Com- 
mons he made a practice of taking notes, and the very fact that most of 
those notes are to be found among the official materials today is signifi- 
cant as to their purpose. In the Parliament of 1620-21, he kept an elabo- 
rate book of notes. Those notes were preserved and published in 1751 as 
"Proceedings and Debates in the House of Commons. 1620-21." They 
were published anonymously, and it was the historian Gardiner who was 
able by a comparison of them with some Nicholas Notes in the Record 
Office to establish Nicholas's authorship. These notes for that session 
are very elaborate. They cover each day of a long session and record a 
large number of speeches. Nicholas, of course, did not get every word, 
but he got the gist of things, the very complete gist of what was said, and 
probably transcribed it from his jottings into a minute-book, where he 
put it down in good form. It is the standard source for the Parliament 
of 1620-21, and it is hardly likely to be superseded. In the Parliament 
of 1624 Nicholas again took notes, at least for part of the session. Those 
notes the editors have not seen. The notes for the debates for the session 
of 1628 have been rotographed for the University of Minnesota. They 
run from the beginning of the session to its end, and, if printed, would 
constitute a small volume of 150 pages perhaps. They offer some in- 
formation not to be found elsewhere about the session of 1628, and Gardiner 



Ixii INTRODUCTION 

made some use of them. They are, however, at the best, brief notes, 
as compared with those made in 1620-21. Nicholas was more used to 
the ways of parliament and did not exert himself to get down the whole 
of a speech. He liked to take notes from about the middle of a speech, 
where the speaker seemed to be approaching his main point. He was 
skilful in compressing into a few sentences the substance of a long and 
labored oration. Sometimes he was so skilful that brief phrases which 
would no doubt have recalled the debate to his own memory are quite 
unintelligible to the student today, except when they are interpreted 
by other minutes. Not only did he not take pains to write down all of 
a speech, but he left out many speeches. Speeches of obscure country 
members, and speeches that did not seem to him to contribute to the 
total debate, were left unrecorded. Once or twice indeed he lumped 
together several speeches on the same subject for a series of days, without 
taking the trouble to give the names of the speakers. He was obviously 
not interested in making a history of parliament, as Simonds D'Ewes 
might have been; rather he was "getting up" the points of view to 
be met with in the Commons, presumably that the Court party might be 
well informed. 

The same may be said of the notes for the session of 1629 with which 
we have here to deal, save that they were more careless than those for 1628. 
Nicholas almost habitually came late, after the debate had been going on 
for. awhile, and he made no effort, as D'Ewes would have done, to record 
what happened before he came in. He put down the points made by the 
leading speakers, though often so briefly that without other minutes it 
would be next to impossible to interpret them. His incompleteness often 
makes him very confusing. He had a way of putting under one mean's 
speech not only that speech, but several others that followed. About 
dramatic speeches or events in parliament he cared not a whit. In one 
unemotional sentence he puts the holding down of the speaker on March 
2, 1629 — a never-to-be-forgotten incident. Some of the most interesting 
discussions that occurred in the Commons he leaves out entirely. He did 
nevertheless record much that we have not elsewhere, or would not have, 
were it not for Grosvenor. And in many instances he has stated matters 
so much better than Grosvenor that he has served to throw light on Gros- 
venor's larger body of details. Contrary to what one would expect, he 
was not particularly partisan in his selection of what to record. Men like 
Eliot and Pym received their share of attention from him, while men who 
were seeking favor with the Court were sometimes left quite out of his 
notes. But there is evidence, nevertheless, that he was writing for the 
King's eye. It looks indeed as if he were endeavoring to make the Com- 
mons seem more conciliatory to the Sovereign than they really were. On 
February 26, he closes his account of the debate on subsidies with the 



INTRODUCTION Ixiii 

remark: "The business is left without question with an inclination that 
we shall speedily fall into consideration of the heades and pointes of a 
Bill of Tonage and Poundage." Such an inclination it is impossible to 
discover from other accounts or from succeeding events. On January 28 
when the Commons were framing the heads of an answer to the message 
of the King, Nicholas's version of those heads made them much more favor- 
able to the Sovereign and much more gracious in tone than they really were. 

Nicholas for 1629 has been used by Gardiner. We do not know of any 
other historical student who has made use of his materials for that year 
or for 1628. 

And it ma}^ be doubted whether Gardiner made as much use of the notes 
as he might well have done, considering the scantiness of materials at his 
disposal. Far be it from the editors to discount Gardiner's pains and yet 
it has seemed as if that great historian overlooked some of the points in 
Nicholas which he found particularly hard to read. It would not be 
surprising, for Nicholas is very difficult. Elsewhere we have given a 
picture of a sample page. It will be seen that Nicholas wrote as the speeches 
were going on, that he wrote in a combination of long-hand and shorthand 
that was peculiarly baffling, particularly the long-hand. Had the notes 
not been so useful the editors would have hesitated long before undertaking 
their transcription. But in the words of Thomas Fuller, "The history 
of the Parliament ... is fundamental to the history of our times." 

Like Nicholas, Sir Richard Grosvenor began his parliamentary career 
in 1620. His attendance from that time was not however continuous, for 
he was not returned again until the session of 1625-26. He was a man of 
importance in his own county of Cheshire, having succeeded his father 
as sheriff in 1619 and been returned to parliament each time from the 
county. In parliament, though we do not often find any record of speeches 
by him, he was frequently found as a member of important committees. 
Whether, like Nicholas, Grosvenor in his first session began taking notes 
of the proceedings in the House of Commons, we do not know. We have 
his notes only for the third Parliament of Charles. For the first session 
he filled five books of the size of the one containing his notes of the session 
from January 23 to March 2, 1629. But these had strayed so far from the 
possessions of the writer before reaching their final resting place in the 
library of Trinity College, Dublin, that we may well hope that notes on 
the earlier parliaments may turn up somewhere else. It was in keeping 
with Grosvenor's character that he should take notes from the first. 

It was also in keeping with his character that Grosvenor should take 
the kind of notes that he did. The little that we know of him shows him 
to have been a simple soul easily taken advantage of by those more wily 
than himself, in commercial matters more concerned as to winning advan- 
tage for his own locality than as to carrying out a national policy of 



Ixiv INTRODUCTION 

mercantilism. It is not surprising that his notes show a man wanting 
insight and discernment. They reveal little selection of material, rather 
an effort as far as possible to get the exact words of the speaker without 
much thought of their significance. But on the other hand he was diligent 
and painstaking. It was this that made him a good committee man. It 
is well illustrated by his report in the Committee on Religion on February 
13 ; not one point is missing there from what had previously been discussed. 
It is this characteristic which gives the chief value to his notes. The fact 
that he tried to get down everything that he could regardless of his own 
special interests makes it possible to get from his notes a sense of propor- 
tion to be foimd nowhere else. Unfortunately it had also the effect of 
making the notes very dreary reading, the dullness of a narrative which 
has no particular point or reason for being told. It is not only we who 
feel this but the men of his own time. Nicholas gives us a little glimpse 
into how they must have sat back resigned in their seats when he rose to 
make one of his lengthy reports. On such a report in 1621 which the printed 
Cmnmons Journals give at some length Nicholas makes only this comment : 
"Sir Richard Grosvenor here out of his Papers read us a large lecture."^ 

That for filling in the gaps in the other accoimts the notes of Grosvenor 
are invaluable is surely apparent. That those for the session of 1629 have 
not been used by any writer yet in print means that there is yet much about 
that session to be told. Their reproduction in this book the editors feel 
is their most valuable contribution to the source material of this period. 

Lowther's account of the Commons Debates for 1629 we have not 
included here because it is printed by the Historical Manuscripts Com- 
mission.^ The notes are brief. Lowther has written nothing for February 
4 to 7 nor for February 10 to 11. Not only so, but his narrative becomes 
briefer after January 30. 

Lowther was evidently not very regiilar in his attendance but was 
careful to fill in from such materials as he could get his hands upon. The 
editor of the Notes in the Historical Manuscripts Commission says "The 
second note-book (he has been talking of the notes for 1628) ... is 
written with greater neatness and regularity, and is probably compiled 
from memory or from rougher notes made during the debates." Those 
notes we may add are of much less value than those of either Nicholas 
or Grosvenor. But they do add details now and then and we have been 
at pains to give in our footnotes to Grosvenor and Nicholas such extracts 
from Lowther as would offer additional or explanatory fact. 

The diaries and letters of this session which we have printed were all 
written at the time or immediately after the day's events by members of 
the House of Commons. These might be supplemented by many diaries 

1 Proceedines and Debates. 1620-21, 2: 219. 
2 Hist. MSS Comn. xiii, pt. 7. Lonsdale MSS. 58-74. 



INTRODUCTION Ixv 

and letters from men who got their information second-hand. Under 
this head must be included not only private letters but those by ambas- 
sadors to their home governments. But the new facts that these add are 
exceedingly few. Their value lies first of all in the point of view of the 
writer which they reveal, and second in the evidence they give as to the 
amoimt of information that was leaking out and the way it was being 
transmitted. Among the most important of the diaries is that kept by 
Walter Yonge.^ He mentions in one place that he had received his infor- 
mation from Mr. Pym. What additional facts he gives have been made 
use of in the footnotes. The Salvetti correspondence has been omitted 
only because it is already in print. It is even more detailed than that of 
Contarini, also now in print. Among the Roman Transcripts in the Record 
Office^ there is a document called "News culled from recent letters from 
London, March 1629," which contains a brief account of the events of 
March 2. Another account of that day's proceedings preserved in manu- 
script is a letter from Robert Dixon to his son-in-law.^ 

3 Add. MSS 35, 331. 

* Gen'l. Ser. I. 91. vol. 347. p. 43. 

6 Add, MSS 34, 727, f. 51. 



CHAPTER VII 
THE ACCOUNT OF MARCH SECOND 

In the State Paper Office are two manuscript copies of an account of 
the events in the Commons on March 2, 1629.^ Neither the date nor any 
clue to the author is given. What we can be reasonably sure of is that the 
accoimt was written immediately after the House adjourned and from 
rather full notes taken on the speeches during their delivery. What was 
the manuscript? Where did it come from? 

A clue to that is to be found, curiously enough, in Sir John Bramston's 
Autobiography. That worthy if rather dull judge gives an account of the 
meeting of the Privy Council on March 3, as "reported by Sir N[icholas] 
Hyde," then Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench, under his own hand. 
At this meeting, he says, a "declaration was read of the speeches used and 
the behaviour of divers of the members of the Commons Plouse the day 
before," which being done, the King commanded the said Judges (who 
had been ordered to attend) to meet and answer such questions as should 
be proposed to them by his Attorney.^ Now it would seem altogether 
likely that the "declaracion" would have been identical with that made use 
of by the King's Attorney in his Information in the Star Chamber against 
Eliot, Holies, Valentine Long, Coryton, Strode, Selden, Hobart and Hay- 
man for their part in the proceedings of March 2.^ But the declaration 
read in that prosecution was identical with the March Second manuscripts, 
if we may judge from the fact that the direct quotations from speeches 
used in that declaration are to be found word for word in the speeches 
used in the March Second narrative. Therefore the March Second narra- 
tive is almost certainly a narrative prepared for the use of the Judges. 

Of the two copies of the March Second narrative the second^ is written 
in two handwritings, and the latter part of it was obviously written in 
a great hurry (probably each of the judges wished a copj^ of his own). It 
is very significant of the purpose of the account that the speech by Wes- 
ton, son of the Lord High Treasurer, is made very brief, but the 
speeches by the Opposition, the speeches that were to be used as evi- 
dence, are given in detail. The same may be said of the narrative part, 
where the story of the seditious proceedings was told. 

The narrative was probably written afterwards, but from very full 
notes of the speeches taken at the time. An indication of this is to be found 
in a comparison of Eliot's long speech as recorded in the March Second 

1 St. p. Dom. Car. I. vol. 138, nos. 6 and 7. 

s The Autobiography of Sir John Bramston, K. B. (Camden Soc.) 49. 

sRushworth, Collections 1:665-70. 

4 No. f . 



INTRODUCTION Ixvii 

narrative with a copy among his own notes at Port EHot. This does not 
mean that Eliot wrote the speech in the form we have it in the March 
Second account. It means merely that whoever did write the speech got 
it very exactly as to wording, a thing possible only if he had taken notes 
at the time. 

The man who wrote the account was undoubtedly a supporter of the 
King. Perhaps it was young Weston, who made a speech which the account 
reports at great length, a speech that was really unimportant and which 
was entirely omitted by both Nicholas and the True Relation. 



Ai TRUE2 RELATION^ OF EVERY DAYS* PROCEEDINGS^ IN« 

PARLIAMENT^ SINCE^ THE^ BEGINNING THEREOPio 

BEING" THE 20TH OF JANUARY^^ 1628^^ 

[In editing the True Relation, we have tried to do two things, to make the text 
as complete as possible, and to free it from all errors of copyists. To make the text 
as complete as possible was not at all the same as to reproduce an original. In doing 
that, one must in each particular incident weigh the evidence as to whether the par- 
ticular word, phrase, sentence, or paragraph found only in some of the copies, has 
been added in those or omitted from others. By the very nature of the True Rela- 
tion every accretion is an integral part of the whole. Yet this principle could not 
be carried to absurd lengths. From the^text have been omitted additional materials 

1 The. Xs; Ti. See key to abbreviations p. 274-75. 
An exact and. 'i'lO.ii. 

2 Diurnal. Ti. 

and perfect, added. 'I'4. 
' Occurrences. Ti. 

or Journal, added. Tt.q. 
'of the. Xi; 'i'2,4,s. 
of all the. Xs,6. 
of seme part of most days. ■*?. 
6 passage. Xio. 

of the last sitting, added. *6. 
6 //j«, added. Xis; T2-4; *4- 
the last session of, added. Xi,3. 
of the last Session of. X14. 
' in the House of Commons, added. Ty.g. 
together with the long speeches, added. Xio. 
holden at Westminster, added. *ii. 
^from. Xio; r7,9. 
' first, added. Xis. 

io5< session, added. X5. 
10 of the last meeting. <['7. 

of this Session, and what was spoken by every man. *i. 
" on, added. X15; ^6. 

Tuesday, added. Xis; Ti, 7,9,10. 
" Anno Domini, added. 'i'S. 

holden in the fourth year of King Charles Anno Domini. Xi. 
13 until the dissolution thereof, added. Xa.S- 
when it began till the 10th of March 1628 when it broke up, added. Xio. 

in the 4th year of the Reign of King Charles unto the 10th of March in the same year when the said 
Parliament was dissolved. Vt,9. 

which ended the tenth of March Anno Dom. 1628. Ti. 
dissolved the 10th March 1628. Xl4. 

The Proceedings, or a Journal of the passages in the Second Session of Parliament holden at Westminster 
in the fourth year of the reign of our most gratious Sovereign Lord Charles, by the grace of God King of England, 
Scotland, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith etc., begun the 20th of January and ended the 10th of 
March then next ensuing Anno Domini 1628. X2; ^s. 

Parliament from 20 January 1628 to 2d March when it broke up. Xp. 

The Second Session of the Parliament holden at Westminster beginning on the 20th of January in the 
4th year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord King Charles and ending the 10th of March following Anno Domini 
1628. X4,7. 

A compendious relation of the proceedings in Parliament holden by prorogation at Westminster the 20th 
day of January 1628 and there continued until the 10th of March then following. *8-io. 



2 COMMONS DEB A TES FOR 1629 

found only in one copy, or known absolutely to be incorrect. Such materials have 
been relegated to the footnotes. 

There is another problem in connection with the making of a complete text; 
no one copy could be used as a basis; it was necessary to build up without even a 
framework upon which to begin. An examination in the appendix of order and omis- 
sions will show how we tried to make a complete whole so far as speeches and paragraphs 
were concerned. It may be well to illustrate the way in which we built up the single 
speech. Noy's speech on February 12, is not an unusual case; yet there is not a 
single copy of that speech which gives it as it is presented in the text. And other 
records is omitted in Xi,5,6; to this in *3,5; to this until . . . confirmation in ^i; 
be declared in $2,3; and a declaration in ^i; hut a confirmation in ^2,3,5; such a decla- 
ration in the hill in X; for us to give it in Tl and <l>2; // it will not . . . cannot help it 
in *3; and it seemeth to he in ^2-12, T, $1-3. 

Editing the text was, however, much more than a process of building up. There 
was the constant necessity of making a choice between the different copies. The 
differences in them are much greater than those to be found in a piece of literature. 
There is not only the problem of slavish and unthinking copyists, but the problem of 
editors who transposed with the greatest freedom. Sometimes indeed the changes 
made by the editors greatly improved the text. For example compare the text of 
Secretary Coke's speech as given on page 70 . . . with the following: That a 
Minister of State, which is said to he himself, having notice of these ten; and this college 
intended to be kept at Clerkenwell. That it is plain there was a place appointed for 
this college, and orders and relics prepared: This Minister made the King acquainted 
with it . . . This was probably the original and is given in all the copies except 
those of the X group, the group which shows the most editing. 

But the changes were not only in order, there was great freedom in the use of 
articles, conjunctions, pronouns and verb tenses. These variations made by the 
seventeenth century editors rarely affected the sense. The same can not be said 
of the variations due to careless copying. It is these that reveal the untrustworthi- 
ness of any one manuscript. The most common error is that of omissions. Noy's 
speech, already adverted to, shows how much more complete is the sense after the 
lost phrases are restored. Very often omissions were the result of the repetition of 
a prominent word or phrase and the copyist's failure to observe the fact that it was 
written twice. For example, on page 12 all between enemies countries and the repeti- 
tion of the same two words is omitted in all but one of the copies belonging to the 
^ group. Another kind of error arose from the effort to fill up omissions. An illus- 
tration of this is to be found in Marten's report (page 55 note 31). The phrase is not 
good was lost. One copyist supplied needless, another difficult. It is obvious that 
each was merely guessing. Again in Kirton's speech of February 21 the warraiits may 
be read was carelessly omitted. One copyist left the speech that way; another, realizing 
that something was wrong, changed the that which immediately followed the phrase 
to let. He made sense of what was nonsense but in doing so, changed the thought. 
Another instance in point is to be found in connection with the effort to supply the 
name of the speaker. For this case see page 64. 

The meaning has often been changed through an omission followed by a change 
in punctuation. On page 76 Sir Francis Seymour's speech ends to Mr. Long. In 
all manuscripts of the r group, the speech ends with the word weight, omitting this 
phrase, and the next speech begins Mr. Long Cross the . . . The X group probably 
followed a manuscript belonging to this group, but in order to clear up the meaning 
gave the reading Mr. Long said that Cross . . . Another instance is to be found in 
Phelips's speech on page 7 which reads: all we shall do shall conduce to a happy 



TRUE RELATION 



conclusion, and to the kings honour and our own safety. Great and weighty grievances 
wound deep. We may imagine, assuming that this is the true reading, that the first 
step in the change was the loss of the word safety. This word is omitted in all of the 
r group except r2,7,8; in all of the X group; and in all of the -^ group except ^i. 
With the exception of ^6 this group has been filled in with other words, content, 
contentment, and good (see page 7, note 3). The next step was to drop and and 
begin the next sentence with the words Our own. This has been done in the separate 
Harl. 2217, in the X group, and in rs.ii. One manuscript has combined the two 
readings, our own safety, our own great . . . T2 and 7 have even a different punc- 
tuation, finishing the first sentence: and our own weighty affairs, and beginning the 
next: But these things . . . 

The errors in the True Relation reading are not, however, confined to omissions 
and additions. There is also disagreement among the manuscripts. The most com- 
mon contradictions are due to a combination of poor writing and ignorance upon 
the part of the copyists, so that we have words similar in form but utterly different 
in meaning as wound and word, lives and laws, mean and went, professed and pressed. 
This confusion becomes more serious when it involves proper names, as the con- 
fusion between Winchester and Chichester, Shervile and Sherland. Another cause 
of difference was due to the use of abbreviations. Middlesex and Middleborough 
were both expanded from Midd. 

It will be evident that necessary compromises due to the multitude of variations 
in the copies could not but affect the character of the finished product. That has 
less of the flavor of the True Relation, less even of the seventeenth century than 
any one copy. This is because we have been forced to use arbitrary rules. One of 
the outstanding characteristics of the True Relation is its inaccuracy in dates and the 
order of proceedings. When the copies agree, this characteristic could be preserved; 
but when they were at variance, and only a few of them followed what the private 
diaries show to be the true order, these copies have been followed. The result is of 
course a text much more accurate than any one copy. 

Another characteristic feature that could not be preserved is the spelling. The 
several copies show what was the most marked peculiarity of the spelling in that 
day, lack of uniformity. Since no one manuscript could be followed, and since there 
was no standard spelling for the period, the only alternative was to adopt modern 
spelling. And the same necessity holds as to capitalization. The manuscripts vary 
from those which capitalize every noun to those almost modern. Not only in the 
text but in footnotes, even where only one manuscript is quoted, we have modernized 
spelling and capitalization. 

In punctuation it was found possible to keep to the seventeenth century usage 
of few periods and colons and numerous commas. To keep to the same usage there 
has been no use of quotation marks or the sign of the possessive, even where it was 
necessary to retain the old spelling majesties. In nothing else have the various manu- 
scripts shown so much carelessness as in punctuation. 

In the matter of notes, we have sought to reduce the number as much as possible. 
If every variant reading had been given, the number of notes would have been so 
great that those which show a difference in sense would have been lost in the mass. 
For this reason we determined to omit all notes whose only service would be to show 
the worth of particular manuscripts. Under this head are included all copyists' 
errors, omissions, differences in the order of words in the sentences, differences in 
tense — in fact any differences which did not really change the sense. We retained 
in the footnotes only variant readings that affected the sense, and such additions 
as were to be found only in one copy. 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 21 



To read the notes intelligently, the student must keep in mind just what manu- 
scripts were collated for that particular speech. By consulting the Appendix the reader 
can from the outline see what copies contained the speech in question ; by consulting 
the table showing to what extent manuscripts were collated, he can tell what copies 
to omit from this list. It will be recalled that the object in collating the copies was 
twofold, not only to get the best text, but also to ascertain the relation of the copies 
to one another. Hence when it was found that dififerences within speeches were of 
no help in classification, some manuscripts were not collated so carefully.] 



TUESDAY THE 20th OF JANUARY 

Upon Tuesday, being the first day of the ParHament,^ nothing was 
done, but only the settling of the Committees.* 

WEDNESDAY THE 21st OF JANUARY 

It^ was ordered a Committee should be appointed to examine what 
innovation- hath been made upon the liberty of the subject against the 
Petition of Right since the end of the last Session of Parliament.* 

And it was also ordered^ that day that Mr. Selden and others should 
see if the Petition of Hight, and his Majesties Answer thereunto, were 
enrolled in the Parliament Rolls and in the Courts at Westminster, as 
his Majesty sent them word the last Session they should be; and also in 
what manner they were entered;^ which was done accordingly. 

Mr. Selden made report to the House that his Majesties speech 
made the last day of the last Session^ in the upper House is also entered by 
his Majesties command. 

Mr. Pym hereupon moved that the debate hereof shotild be deferred 

January 20. 

1 the first meeting of the House. Vg. 
the House met but, added. X9. 
after prayers were ended, added. XS- 
» For other business see C.J. 1:920, also Lowther's diary in Lonsdale MSB (Hist. MSS Comm. 13th 
Report. App. vii pp. 58-59). Such omissions are merely an indication of the way in which the True Rela- 
tion kept to the main issues before the House. 

January 21. 

> The order of the House of Commons. It. *2. 
^invasion. Xi,9.io,i2. 
^altered. Xii.is. 
enrolled. X3. 
in the Rolls, added. Xi. 
* Parliament, -if; Xi.4,5,10; Ti, 5,6, 10, 11. 

of Parliament, added. X3. 
» This statement is misleading. Selden only moved that a special committee be appointed. The 
motion followed his report. For the order of events on this day, Lowther is a much better authority 
(See p. 6 note c), than the True Relation. This was a separate put in at random. 
^ This order was made upon Selden's motion. 



January 21 TRUE RELATION 5 

till Tuesday^ next, by reason^ of the fewness of the House, many being not 
then come. 

Sir John Eliot. Since this matter is now raised, it concerns the 
honour of the House and the liberty of the Kingdom. It is true it de- 
serves to be deferred till there be a fuller House; but it is good to prepare 
things, for I find it is a great point. ^ I desire therefore that a select Com- 
mittee may enter into consideration thereof, and also how other liberties 
of the Kingdom be invaded. I find in the country the Petition of Right 
printed indeed, but with an answer* that never gave any satisfaction. 
I desire a Committee may consider thereof, and present it to the House, 
and that the printer may be sent for to give satisfaction to the House, and 
to be examined about it, and to declare by what warrant it was printed; 
which was so ordered. 

Mr. Selden. For this Petition of Right, it is known to some how it 
hath been lately violated since our last meeting; the liberties for^ life, 
person, and freehold, how have they been invaded ? Have not some been 
committed contrary to that Petition? • Now we, knowing this invasion, 
must take notice of it.) For liberties in^" estate, we know of an order 
made in the Exchequer, that a sheriff was commanded not to execute a 
replevin; and mens goods are taken away, and must not be restored; and 
also no man ought to lose life or limb, but by the law, and hath not one 
lately lost his ears (meaning Savage that was censured in the Star 
Chamber by an arbitrary judgment and sentence) ? Next they will take 
our arms, and then our legs, and so our lives. Let all see that we are 
sensible of these customs creeping upon us.^^ Let us make a just repre- 
sentation hereof to his Majesty. 

Norton, the Kings printer, was called^^ ^q ^j^q g^r and asked^^ by what 
warrant the additions to the Petition of Right were printed. He answered, 
there was a warrant (as he thought) from the King himself. And being 

« on other time. X3. 

Wednesday. Xii. 

Saturday, 'i'8,9. 
« in regard. X3. 
' point of great consequence. Xi-8. 

point of great importance. Xg.io. 
8 addition. X3. 
•0/. X3. 

iio/. Xr-s,io; "I'll. 
" like *; same except crept in. *6; Tii. 

of these customs which creep upon us. Ti. 

how these customs creep in upon us. Xii; '^2,5,10. 

of this; customs creep on us. Xl-io, 13-15; ^1,7-9,11. 

of those, customs creep on us. 'J'4. 

how they creep upon us. X15. 
^^brought. Xi-io,i3-iS; *. 
18 demanded. Xp. 

and the House demanded of him. 'J'4. 



6 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 162Q January 21 

asked^* whether there were not some copies printed without additions, he 
said there were some, but they were suppressed by some warrant. 

Sir John Eliot desired some clearer^^ satisfaction might be made,^^ 
and that he might answer directly by what warrant. 

Whereupon he was called in again, and said he did not remember the 
particular warrant, ^^ but sure he was that there was a warrant." 

» He was further demanded. X3; '^i. 
« better. X1-8.10. 
^» given. 'i'S.io. 
"like T2-4. 

particular. X; *r-6,8-i2; rs-7.9-ii. 

Particulars. *?; TS. 
• Lowther's notes for this day (which he wrongly dates as the 21st) deserve reprint. 

Mr. Selden moves that a Committee may be named to see whether the petition and answer made 
by the King be recorded in the parliament Roll and in the Courts of Westminster, as was promised by 
his Majesty, and also to see what hath been entered in the journal book of the parliament since the ending 
of the former session. Which upon view was found that the King's speech, which was a comment upon 
his answer, was added by his command, the consideration of which is referred to Tuesday next, how much 
herein the privilege of the kingdom and the subjects are infringed. And he reports how all our liberties 
have been since infringed, by the order in the Exchequer that after a replevin under the great seal, the 
execution thereof hath been stayed by their order, and in other things, and desires that a Committee may 
be chosen to seek out wherein the liberties have been infringed, and represent it to the House. 

Secretary Coke moves that we should not seek occasions, but rather that they should seek us: 
for is there not a Committee of the whole House for grievances, and why should we make a particular 
Committee since there is a general? And I think there is no man here but desires a fair correspondence 
betwixt the King and his subjects, which if we proceed moderately I doubt not but we shall sooner effect 
our desires. 

Sir John Elliot moves that the printer may be sent for that printed that addition, besides the 
petition, and answer to know by what authority it was done, since those two were to go alone: which was 
agreed to. 

Much disputed whether to have a standing Committee for to inquire and present the grievances 
to the House, and wherein the liberties have been invaded. 

Sir Dudley Digges: I am jealous that the manner may by sinister constructions mar the 
matter, which if we be cautious and be not too hasty to seek new ways, which may be thought to be, if 
we pursue this way to have particulars where the general may do as good service and not be so subject 
to misinterpretation. And we must not only respect our own intentions, but what constructions others 
may make of it. 

Mr. Price of the same opinion, and tells how that it hath been taken notice of in other places to the 
great dishonour of the House, to subtract a parliament out of parliament. 

Sir William Herbert: This comes near the Spanish Inquisition to make particular inquisitors. 

Sir John Elliot excepts against the words, and moves that the gentleman will be more cautious, 
that he let not such words fall. 

Littleton: This is no new way but necessary, for if we should stay to particulars occasioned the 
consideration, we might lose the matter, and suffer prejudice in the meantime. 

Sir Thomas Hoby: I will not say that this is a new way, but this is the course; that if any member 
of the House prefer a petition to the committee of grievances, he need not set his name to it, but it may 
come in so by petition. But if a stranger prefer a petition he must have his name to it, and defend it; 
but since the members have that liberty, it may be better done that way. 

Sir Nathaniel Rich: This is no unusual way, and it is not proper for the committee of grievances, 
for that is proper for the well-being of the subjects; but this doth touch the very being of them, and there- 
fore proper for a proper committee. 

And upon his motion: — 

Resolved upon question, that the whole House shall be resolved into a committee, to consider 
all those things wherein the privileges of the subjects have been infringed against the petition of right; 
and to begin on Tuesday next at 9 o'clock in the morning. 

Mr. Norton the printer, being asked by what authority the addition was added to the petition of 
right and the answer, doth say that he had a warrant, but doth not remember from whom. To prevent 
any misdealing Mr. Selden, Littleton, &c. appointed to go with him to see the warrant immediately. 



January 22 TRUE RELATION 7 

THURSDAY THE 22nd OF JANUARY 

One Mr. Rolles, a merchant and a member of the House, informed 
the House, that his goods were seized by the customers for refusing to 
pay the custom by them^ demanded, although he told them, what was 
adjudged to be due by law he would pay. 

Sir Robert Phelips. By this information you see the unfortunate- 
ness of these times, and how full time it was for this Assembly to meet 
again to serve his Majesty, and to preserve ourselves; and I am confident 
we come hither with full intention to do both,^ and all we shall do shall 
conduce to a happy conclusion, and to the Kings honour and to our own 
safety .3 Great and weighty grievances^ wound deep; cast your eyes which 
way you please, and you shall see violations on all sides. Look on the 
liberty of the subject, look on the privilege of this House; let any man say 
if ever he read or saw the like violations by inferior ministers that overdo 
their commands.^ They knew the party was a Parliament man; nay, 
they said, if all the Parliament were in you, this we would do and justify 
(meaning the denial of the replevin).® If we suffer the liberties of this 
House, out of fear or complement to be abused,^ we shall give a wound to 
the happiness of this Kingdom. See here how the course of justice is 
interrupted ; for first an order in the Exchequer was made for staying of the 
goods; and since here is a seiztu-e made, upon the approaching of the Par- 
liament, of goods amounting to the value of 5000£ for a pretended duty of 
200£. In the first year of King James his reign, by reason of the sickness 

January 22. 
' order. Vg. 

i fullness of both. Xii.is; *; T; *. 
* content. ^4,5,10. 

contentment, vt'2,3. 

good. *8,9. 
*like Harl. 2217 (separate). 

affairs. Fs.S. 

things, all others. 
' Instead of let any . . . , all together will not hinder inferior ministers and officers, but they will still 
dare to overdo their commands. Harl. 2217. 

« They knew the party was a Parliament man, and yet you see by Mr. Rolles his complaint that his goods 
were seized by the customers for refusing to pay the customs by them demanded, although he told them he would 
pay what was adjudged due by law. Nay they told him, if all the Parliament were in you, this we would do 
and justify it. Harl. 2217. 
'like Harl. 2217. 

out of fear or complaint to be abused. V2. 

to wither, and ourselves thus abused. Xi. 

to wither out of fear. X2-S. 

to wither out of fear or complement. Xq.io; *. 

to wither out of fear or complaint. Xii,i3; r3,4,io. 

to wither out of fear of complaint, ■iry; r7,9. 

to wither out for fear of complaint. *2-6,io. 

to wither out with fear of complaint. *8,9,ii. 

to wither out of fear and contempt. Tii. 

so to wither away out of fear to complain. Xis. 



8 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 22 

that then was, the Parliament was prorogued, and then there was some 
boldness to take this Tonnage and Poundage, and then we questioned the 
men that demanded it, for there v/as no right to demand it. Let us proceed 
with perseverance in our duties^ to make up breaches. Let a committee be 
appointed to consider of these proceedings.^ 

Here Mr. Littleton made a short speech to second him, and all to the 
same purpose; but for brevity sake I omit it.^° 

Secretary Coke desired that moderation might be used.^^ 

Mr. Littleton. We have good admonitions, and we have followed 
them. We have moderation preached unto us in Parliament. ^^ I would 
others did the like out of Parliament. Let the parties be sent for that 
violated the liberties of Parliament to have their doom. 

Sir John Eliot. I see by this relation what cause we have to be 
tender of the liberty of the Kingdom and this House; and yet withal to 
retain that moderation, as to give satisfaction to the world that our hearts 
are fixed to serve his Majesty, and to free us from offer of jealousy. Three 
things are involved in this complaint. 

1. The right of the particular gentleman. 

2. The right of the subject. 

3. The right and privilege of this House. 

Let the Committee consider of the two former; but for the violation 
of the liberties of this House, let us not do less than our forefathers. Was 
ever the information of a member of the House committed to a com- 
mittee ?* Let us send for the parties.^^ Is there not^* here a bare denial 
of the restitution of the goods ? Was it not also said, that if all the Par- 
liament were contained in him, they would do as they did? Let them 
be sent for. 

It was ordered that the officers of the Custom House should be sent for. 

Mr. Selden reported from the Committee concerning the printing 
of the Petition of Right, that there were 1500 copies printed without 
any addition at all, which were published in the time of the last Parlia- 

^ wilh affeclion of duty. Xg.ii; '4'2-i2; T; *. 
* duties. Xr,2,4,6. 
lo Like *i. 

Here Mr. Littleton made a speech to second him which I omit for brevity. *2, 3,3,6. 
Here Mr. Littleton made a speech to second him. Fi. 

Here Mr. Littleton made a speech to second him as foUoweth. Xi, 10,13, 14; r2,8,io. 
"like ^s.6,io. / desire that every thing may go well, and it will the better certainly if moderation be 
used. Xis. 

The others omit this, but put after Littleton's speech: This speech was occasioned by Secretary 
Coke who in his speech desired that moderation might be used. 
^'^ and we have followed it, udded. Xs.is; Fy. 
" that violated the liberty, added. 'J'S. 
"mo< omitted in X9; 'i's.6,8-ii; ri,3-i2; *. 

» A select committee was appointed to consider "the Subject's Liberty, in general" and the particulars 
concerning Mr. RoUes. C.J., 1:921. 



January 22 TRUE RELATION 9 

ment; but since the last Parliament other copies have been printed with 
the additions and those suppressed and made waste paper, which the 
printer did, as he said, by command from Mr. Attorney, which he re- 
ceived from his Majesty. And the printer further said that the Attorney 
was with the Lord Privy Seal at Whitehall, and there the said Lord de- 
livered to the printer sundry papers with divers hands to them, and on 
the back side were indorsed these words. We will and command you that 
these copies he printed?' 

b Lowther's whole account of January 22, which he misdates as the 23rd, deserves insertion. 

"A bill for reversing of a decree in Chancery made against Laurence Lownes, sheweth: — Whereas 
Peter Bland did for divers considerations convey by bargain and sale, fine and other conveyance, settle 
to the said Laurence Lownes two manors worth only 20o£ per annum, and for which he hath paid and 
secured to be paid above 300o£; and the same estates by a decree in Chancery upon a pretence that the 
same was got by fraud, and when the said Peter was of sick and weak estate and not of a disposing memory, 
which as in the bill is alleged was not so as is pretended, and that this is a dangerous precedent to sub- 
vert the common conveyance of the land by a decree in equity, which heretofore hath not been: and since 
the said decree is only reversible by the high House of Parliament it is desired the same decree may be 
reversed and made void, against the parties for whom it was given; saving to all others their rights, &c. 

A question whether a writ for election may be granted by the Lord Keeper in the vacation upon a 
prorogation, or by the Speaker, or may by both; this referred to the committee of privileges. 

Mr. Rowles reports how his goods were taken for not payment of custom as was usual, though he 
offered security to pay what was due by law or adjudged by parliament, but his profier was refused, and 
[blank] said if Mr. Rowles had all the House of Commons in him he would [do] what he did. Where 
upon he brought a replevin, which [was] got with much ado and delivered it to the sheriff, but the execu- 
tion was stayed by an order of the Exchequer. Afterward he brought another replevin in London return- 
able in the hustings, and the officers taking them to deliver them to the party; but they were rescued and 
so he could not have them. And he had divers other goods which was seized, amounting to the value of 
500o£ and their own demands was 20o£; which in Kling James's time, when any denial was made they 
did but seize so much goods as amounted to their own demands, but now they do it with that violence 
that they take all. 

Officers: Worsenam, Dawes, Carmerden, John Baupage, Mease, Rodgers. 

Mr. Littleton: Two things are considerable in this; first whether tonnage and poundage be due 
without act of parliament, and it is clear it is not, and in Edw.: Ill's time it was taken from the King 
and given to the merchants for the guarding of the seas, and it hath been given for years. 

The second thing is whether a parliament man shall not have the privileges for his goods, as well 
as for his person. For [blank]. 

Secretary Coke: I would that we proceed as judges, and not to prejudicate the matter nor to 
aggravate it; for in weighty matters we ought to be moderate and move slowly, for it may be, though I 
will not say, that all the things may not be true. 

Sir Benjamin Rudyard to the same purpose. Parliament party not to be in love with monarchy. 

Moved by Phillips, Coriton, &c. That a special committee may be named to take a particular 
disquisition and examination touching Mr. Rowles's information. 

Mr. Selden: His information consists of two parts; first that which toucheth him as a parliament 
man, his privilege ought not to be referred to a committee, but for the House to take it upon the relation 
of the member: and whereas it was said that it may be untrue, that is not parliamentary. And for the 
other I think it fit to be referred to the committee, as it is a wrong to the subject. 

Secretary Coke: That which I said, that it may be, I might be untrue, I might have said it affirm- 
atively, and I pray you that you will have as much credit to one member as to another. But note that 
he spoke to the question in this speech, otherwise it had been against order. 

Resolved that a committee to be named to consider of the information of Mr. Rowles, which 
toucheth the infringing of the liberty of the subject in general. 

Resolved that those officers to be sent for to answer their contempt to the House touching Mr. 
Rowles; and also to attend the committee to be examined touching the other matter before, in the Court 
of Wards this afternoon. 

Mr. Selden reports that upon examination of the printers for the first impression without those 
additions, there were 1500 printed, sitting the parliament and before they were dispersed. The next 
day after the parliament Mr. Attorney sent for him to his chamber and told him that this impression 



10 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 24 



FRIDAY THE 23rd OF JANUARY 

His Majesty sent a message to the House which was delivered by 
Secretary Coke as f olloweth •} 

Whereas there hath been debate raised in this House concerning the 
seizure of merchants goods by his Majesties officers and ministers, his 
Majesty wisheth that any further debate or proceeding in that case^ be 
forborne till to-morrow at two of the clock in the afternoon, when his 
Majesty is resolved to speak with both Houses at Whitehall and hereof 
we^ are to take notice.'* 

Upon which the House arose for the day. 

SATURDAY THE 24th OF JANUARY 

Both Houses being met in the Banqueting House the King made a 
speech in manner following •} 

My Lords and Gentlemen; 

The care I have to remove all obstacles that may hinder the good 
correspondency^ betwixt me and this Parliament is the cause I have called 
you hither at this time, the particular occasion being a complaint lately 
made in the Lower House. And for you, my Lords,^ I am glad to take 
this, and all other occasions, whereby you may clearly understand both 
my words and actions ; for as you are nearest in degree, so you are the 
fittest witnesses to" Kings. The complaint I speak of is for staying mens 

was not to go out so, and afterward Mr. Attorney sent for him to Whitehall and gave him a warrant 
for the imprinting of those papers which were pinded together. And the Lord Privy Seal also sent for 
him to his house, and told him that the first impression was not to be printed alone. 

Secretary Coke reports from the King that he avoweth that it was by his warrant and direction, 
and his Majesty doth avow it. 

January 23. 

1 His Majesty upon this day sent the Houses of Parliament, as well the upper as the lower, a message by 
Secretary Coke. X12. 

* business. X3; ■^S- 
3 yoic. 'ifb. 

♦ His Majesty sent the House a message to this effect, that he willed them to cease from further debate of 
Tonnage and Poundage till the next day in the afternoon, and that he would sPeak with them in the Banquet- 
ing-House at Whitehall. Xis; ri,3-i2; *, 

January 24. 

1 The King made a speech in the Bangueting-House at Whitehall. Ty,9- 

The King made a speech to that purpose. *i. 

The King made a speech as followelh. T^. 

The King made a speech. *2-6. 
' and cause a misunderstanding, added. ■*!. 
3 of the higher House, added. *!. 
4/or. X2; *!; ri.ii; Cambridge, Gg. iv-i3. f- 96. 

of. XiS- 



January 24 TRUE RELATION 11 

goods that denied Tonnage and Poundage. This may have an easy and 
short conclusion, if my words and actions be rightly understood; for 
by passing the bill as my ancestors have had it, my by-past actions will 
be included, and my future proceedings^ authorized; which certainly 
would not have been struck on,^ if men had not imagined that I have 
taken these duties as appertaining to my hereditary prerogative, in which 
they are much deceived; for it ever was and still is my meaning, by the 
gift of my people to enjoy it ; and my intention in my speech at the ending 
of the last Session concerning this point was not to challenge Tonnage and 
Poundage as of right, but de bene esse; showing you the necessity, not the 
right, by which I was to take it, until you had granted it to me; assuring 
myself according to your general professions, that you wanted time not 
will to give it to me. Wherefore now having opportunity, I expect that 
without loss of time you make good your professions; and so by passing 
of the bill to put an end to all the questions arising from this subject, 
especially since I have cleared the only scruple that can trouble you in 
this business. To conclude, let us not be jealous one of anothers actions; 
for if I had been easily moved at every occasion, the order 3''ou made on 
Wednesday last^ might have made me startle; there being some show to 
suspect that you had given yourselves the liberty to be inquirers after 
complaints, the words of your order being somewhat largely penned; 
but looking into your actions, I find you only hear complainers ,^ not 
seeking complaints, for I am certain you neither intend^ nor desire the 
liberty to be inquirers after mens actions before particular complaints be 
made. 

This I have spoken to show you how slow I am to believe harshly of 
your proceedings; likewise to assure you that the Houses resolutions, not 
particular mens speeches, shall make me judge well or ill, not doubting 
but according to my example you will be deaf to ill reports^" concerning 
me, till my words and actions speak for themselves; so that this Session 
beginning with confidences^ one towards another, it may end with a perfect, 
good understanding between us; which God grant. Amen. 

^actions. Xi,2,i5. 

''at. ri; Cambridge, Gg. iv-13. f. 96. 
' made in the lower House on Wednesday night last. ■9i. 
Mike Xi. 
you are only complainers. Xis; Fi; Cambridge Gg. iv-13, f. 96. 
you only hear complaints. *i. 
» pretend. Xis; Ti. 
>" all ill reports and rumors, ^1. 
" a mutual confidence, ^i. 



12 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 26 

MONDAY THE 26th OF JANUARY* 

Mr. Waller^ did inform the House that there were divers ships laden 
with com for Spain and other enemies countries. Whereupon a com- 
mittee was appointed to inquire about the trading into Spain and other 
enemies countries, and concerning the transporting of corn and other 
munition^ thither. 

It was ordered that some of the Privy Council should move the King 
about the stay of the ships. 

Mr. Secretary Coke then moved that the bill of Tonnage and 
Poundage might be read, and after some debate it was diverted, and then 
they felP upon points of Religion. 

Mr. Rouse concerning Religion.* 

Mr. Speaker, We have of late entered into consideration of the Petition 
of Right, and the violation of it, and upon good reason, for it concerns our 
goods, liberties, and lives ;^ but there is a right of an higher nature that 
preserves for us far greater things, eternal life, our souls, yea our God 
himself; a right of Religion derived to us from the King of Kings, con- 
ferred upon us by the King of this Kingdom, enacted by laws in this place, 
streaming down to us in the blood of the martyrs, and witnessed from 
Heaven by miracles, even by miraculous deliverances. And this right, 
in the name of this Nation, I this day claim, and desire that there may be 
a deep and serious consideration of the violations of it. I desire first 
that it may be considered what new paintings are laid upon the old face 
of the whore of Babylon to make her seem more lovely, and to draw so 
many suitors to her. I desire that it may be considered how the See of 
Rome doth eat into our Religion and fret into the banks and walls of it, 
the laws and statutes of this realm; especially since those laws have been 
made in a manner by themselves, even by their own treasons and bloody 
designs, and since their Popery is a confused mass of errors, casting down 
Kings before Popes, the precepts of God before the traditions of men, 
living and reasonable men before dead and senseless stocks and stones. 
I desire that we may consider the increase of Arminianism, an error that 

January 26. 

1 concerning transportation of corn, added. "4'4. 
Mr. Wallers information concerning ships bound for Spain. 'i'S. 

^commodities, Xii, 

> and so they resolved first to fall. Xi-8. 

* the which Mr. Rouse did first move as followeth. X. 
the which Mr. Rouse did first mention. *. 

flaws, 'i'li; T; Sloane 4155, f. 179. 

» Sir Edward Nicholas's Notes begin on this day with Mr. Waller's speech. From this date to Febru- 
ary 6 (the point at which Grosvenor's Diary begins), it is the most satisfactory account, the one to be 
followed by the reader who wishes the best narrative of events. For this reason, all notes explaining the 
course of proceedings and all cross references to additional material in the other accounts are from this 
point given under that text. 



January 26 TRUE RELATION 13 

maketh the grace of God lackey it after the will of man, that maketh the 
sheep to keep the shepherd, that maketh mortal seed of an immortal God. 
Yea, I desire that we may look into the belly and bowels of this Trojan 
horse, to see if there be not men in it ready to open the gates to Romish 
tyranny and Spanish monarchy. For an Arminian is the spawn of a 
Papist; and if there come the warmth of favour upon him, you shall see 
him turn into one of those frogs that rise out of the bottomless pit. And 
if you mark it well, you shall see an Arminian reaching out his hand to 
a Papist, a Papist to a Jesuit, a Jesuit gives one hand to the Pope and the 
other to the King of Spain ; and these men having kindled a fire in our neigh- 
bour country,^ now they have brought over some^ of it hither, to set on flame* 
this Kingdom also. Yea let us further search and consider whether these 
be not the men that break in upon the goo*ds and liberties of this Common- 
wealth,^ for by this means they make way for the taking away of our 
Religion. It was an old trick of the Devil when he meant^° to take away 
Jobs Religion, he began at his goods, saying to God, Lay thy hand on that 
he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. Either they think hereby to set 
a distaste between prince and people, or to find some other way of supply 
to avoid or break Parliaments, that so they may break in upon our Religion, 
and bring in their own errors. ^^ But let us do as Job did, he held fast his 
Religion, and then his goods were restored to him^^ ^^]x\l advantage; and 
if we hold fast God and his^^ Religion, these things shalP* be added unto 
us. Let us consider^^ the times past, how we^^ flourished in honour and 
abundance, but as Religion decayed so the honour and strength of this 
Nation^'' decayed; when the soul of a Commonwealth is dead, the body 
cannot long overlive it. If a man meet a dog alone, the dog is fearful, 
though never so fierce by nature; but if that dog have his master with^* 
him, he will set upon that man from whom he fied^^ before. This shows 
that lower natures being backed by higher increase in courage and strength ; 

^countries. X3, 10,11,15; Sloane 41SS, f. 179; pamphlet printed for W. H., London, 1641. 

^ the flame. T2. 

»fire. r2. 

* Kingdom. Xi-3,s; 'J'l. 

^"wint. Xis; -irii; Stowe 361, Harl. 3787, f 140. 
" contrary, corrupt errors. X3. 
" his goods came again. V. 
"owr. Xs.ii.is; Tz. 
^^will. Xis; pamphlet. 
^rememher, Xii. 

^*they. Xi-3,S,io; 'i'i,3.io,ri; Sloane 4155, f. 179; Harl. 3787, f. 140; Cambridge, Gg. iv-13. 
^^ Kingdom. X1-3; T; Harl. 3787. f. 140. 

"fey. Xi-3,is; ri-2; pamphlet; Stowe 156, f. 216; Harl. 161, f. IS7; Sloane 4155. f- i79; Stowe 361: 
Sloane 826. 

i^ whom he feared. Stowe 156, f. 216; Sloane 2531. 



14 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 26 

and certainly man being backed with-° omnipotency, is a kind of omnipo- 
tent thing. All things are possible to him that believeth; and where all 
things are possible, there is a kind of omnipotency. Wherefore let it 
now be the unanimous consent and resolution of us all to make a vow and 
covenant from henceforth to hold fast our God and our Religion, and 
then shall we from henceforth certainly expect prosperity in this King- 
dom and Nation; and to this covenant let every one say Amen}^ 

Sir Francis Seymour. If Religion be not a rule^^ to all our actions 
what policy can we have ? If God fight not our battles, the help of man 
is in vain. In our defects, the cause thereof is our defect in Religion, 
and the sins of^^ idolatry and popery. 2* Papists increase now more than 
ever,2^ neither do they want their priests and masses. Nay,^^ his Majes- 
ties name is used to stop proceedings against Papists, and that since the 
Parliament,^^ contrary to his Majesties goodness and public profession, 
and contrary to his many proclamations and instructions to the judges; 
and whatsoever is done in the country is undone above. 

Mr. Kirton. 

Mr. Speaker, This business that we have in hand concerning Religion 
is of dangerous consequence if it be not thoroughly^^ looked into. I think 
there is no man that sits here but is sensible in what danger now it stands,^^ 
if this Honourable House doth not find some present remedy for it. It is 
apparent to every man that new opinions are brought in^*^ by some of our 
Churchmen to disturb the peace that our Church was formerly in; the 
meaning of it can be no other but to bring in the Romish Religion amongst 
us; for it hath ever been a Jesuited policy, first to work a disturbance,^^ 
and after that a change; we must seek the cause. I freely speak^^ my 

M&y. Xio; r2,9; Harl. 161, f. 157: Stowe36i; Harl. 3787. f- 140. 

SI // we hold our Cod we shall hold our goods, and all we have; if we be backed with omnipotency from 
heaven we shall prevail. Let hs resolve to prefer our Religion and God will prefer us. X13. 
22 guide. T2-4. 

to rule, added. *8. 
23«B»s. *8,io,ii; ri,3-io; *. 

sin therefore is. r2,ii. 

same is. X15. 
2< In our defects of punishing consisteth the cause of this confusion «n our Religion. The principal cause 
of this confusion is idolatry; for. Harl. 2217. 

" since Queen Elizabeth began to reign, added. Harl. 2217. 

M Nay one thing I much wonder at, that. Harl. 2217, 

" ever since the last session of Parliament. Harl. 2217. 

^^ straightly. *i-3.S-9. 

5» we stand. Xi-3,io. 

so spring up and brought in. X3. 

»i distraction. Harl. 2217. 

'2 like Stowe 361, f. 156; Sloane 826, f. 140. 

I shall freely speak. *; X. 

I shall briefly speak. TT,g,ii, 



January 26 TRUE RELATION 15 

opinion, that is, that this proceeds from the ambition of some of the 
clergy that are near his Majesty. For it is well known that at first the 
Church of Rome, and that^^ which we now profess, were all one; and then 
the ambition of the clergy begot and brought in all those differences that are 
betwixt us. The highest dignity that they can attain unto here in England 
is an Archbishopric; but a Cardinals cap is not here to be had. I believe 
that some of them affect that too well, and in some of them we see the 
effects, ^^ how they change their opinions for advancement, and how they 
turn white into black, and black into white. This being so, our en- 
deavours must be to take away the root, and then the branches will decay 
of themselves. It is not the calling in of the Appeale to Caesar that will 
do it;^^ for if they can get bishoprics for writing such books, we shall 
have many more that will write books in that kind. It behooves us all, 
every man according to his best ability, to employ himself in the search 
of these things, that we may find out both the matter and the men, that 
we may present them and the dangers this Kingdom stands in by them to 
his Majesty; and for my part, I, as God shall enable me, will do my best 
herein.^^ 

Mr. Sherland. We have a Religion that is worth the loving with 
all our hearts. It was sealed^^ with^^ the blood of martyrs, and kept by 
miracles. To have our noses wiped of this would grieve any^^ heart; much 
more to see our Religion quite taken^" away and designs made''^ on it ,^2 and 
Arminianism still to increase as it doth. I admire, I persuade myself, the 
greater part of the clergy,"*^ nobility, and gentry are firm; but it is the desire 
of some few that labour to bring in a new faction of their own ; and so they 

« the doctrine of Religion, Harl. 2217. 

^ them the effects prove it true. Harl. 2217. 

'5 that will serve your turn. Stowe 361, f. 156. 

3« // ever now is the time to speak. We see what men are raised to preferment. If we look not to it, I 
shall more fear a sudden change of Religion than the Spanish Armada was feared in 88, or the loss of the 
Sound. Mounlague was here questioned, but things continue as they did. We see the King to all our com- 
forts is right. It comes not from him, but some that are too near him are too busy in this. The ambition of 
some of the clergy hath brought in these stirs. We see the pulpits are full of them. We see some that wear 
white and black, lis more than Mountague. Let us bend our wits to reform them, ^ii, 14,15; *. 

^T settled. Xii; *2,4-ii; ri-4,7-12; *I.3-S. 

"6y. Xi,3-s,ii,i3,i5; *2, 4, 5,7-11; *. 
in. ^6. 

>*my. ^ii; Ti. 

«0go. X9,ii,is; 'J'2-ii; ri,3-i2; *. 
perish. T2. 
taken clear. Xio. 

" practised. T2. 
daily, added. Xis; *3.5. 

«o/. *8,9; *i. 

« Instead of To have our noses .... And it would grieve any good heart more to see Religion perish 
by designs daily practised than for whatsoever might be done unto him. Arminianism so increasing as it 
doth; I do admire it. Yet I am persuaded the greater part of the clergy. T2, 



16 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 27 

drop^^ into the ears of his Majesty/^ and so suggest that those that oppose 
them oppose his Majesty, and so they put him upon designs^^ that stand not 
with pubHc liberty, and tell him that he may command what he listeth and do 
what he pleaseth with goods, lives, and Religion.*^ And so they involve all 
true-hearted Englishmen and Christians under the name^^ of Puritans, and 
so involve their quarrels to be his Majesties,^^ which is treason in the high- 
est degree and quality. 

Sir Robert Phelips. I take^° myself much bounden to those 
gentlemen that first set this on foot; if any man be too^^ zealously trans- 
ported in this, it is for his Religion, let that excuse him. Two sects are 
dangerously^^ crept in to undermine King and Kingdom, if not now pre- 
vented, the one ancient Popery, the other new Arminianism. What 
misery befell the Jews when they broke their peace with God ! What hath 
been the event of our late designs^^ since these heresies crept in? Have 
we not still turned our backs upon oiir enemies? I am afraid that God 
sitteth in the council of our enemies against us. Doth not God pay^* us 
with enemies abroad, and distraction^* at home ? We are become the most 
contemptible nation in the world. Are not our miseries and our crosses 
daily increased? With grief do I express that fatal perishing of the late 
hopeful Prince of Bohemia. I desire therefore that we may humble our- 
selves before God by fasting and prayer, that we may bring him again 
into England into our actions, to go before our armies, that God may 
icrown our actions and bless our counsels. 

TUESDAY THE 27th OF JANUARY 
A petition was exhibited^ against one Lewis that said, about the 25th 
of December, The Devil take the Parliament, which was avowed by two- 

** creep. Xii. 

and this they do by dropping. Vy.Q. 

insert. Xis. 
*• new opinions, added, "if 2. 
*> new designs. Tz. 

*' Instead of and tell him that .... That he commands what he lists with lives, goods, and Religion, 
and doth as he pleaseth. Xii; ■^2-11; T; *. 
48 odious name. Xp. 
*' and so involve his Majesty in their quarrels. Xio. 

and so involve his Majesties quarrel to be theirs. Xii; T; $2-5. 

and so make his quarrel to be theirs. Xis. 
^"hold. *i,i2. 
» so. '5'i,2,s,6. 
62 damnably, "^i, 

" What hath blasted our designs, ^i. 
^* plague. *i. 
55 destruction. I'l. 
January 27. 

^preferred. Xi, 2,4-6, 10. 

delivered. X3. 
' four. *4. 



January 27 TRUE RELATION 17 

witnesses, and though it was spoken out of Parliament, yet it was re- 
solved to be an offence to^ the Parliament, and it was ordered that he 
shotild be sent for. 

Sir Nathaniel Rich tendered a petition concerning the Fast; which 
was agreed^ to be preferred^ to the King as f olloweth : 

Most Gracious Sovereign, 

It is the hearty and very earnest desire of us your most dutiful sub- 
jects, the Lords spiritual and temporal and Commons in this present 
Parliament assembled,^ that this our Meeting may be abundantly blessed 
with all happy success in the great^ affairs of Church and State, upon 
which we are to consult; and that by a clear understanding both of yoiir 
Majesties goodness to us, and of our ever faithful and loyal hearts to your 
person and service (all jealousies^ and distractions, which are apparent 
signs of Gods displeasure, and of ensuing mischief being removed) there 
may be in this Session, and forever be, a perfect and most happy union 
and agreement between your Majesty and all the estates of your Realm. 
But humbly acknowledging that neither this nor any other blessing can 
be expected without the special favour of Almighty God, and having 
upon the observation of the continued and increasing miseries of the 
reformed Churches abroad (whose cases Vv^ith bleeding hearts we do com- 
miserate^), as likewise of those punishments already inflicted, and which 
are likely in great measure to fall upon ourselves, we have just cause to 
conceive that the Divine Majesty is for our sins exceeding offended with 
us. We do in this and all other pious respects, most dear^° Sovereign, 
humbly beseech your most excellent Majesty, that by your royal com- 
mand, not only ourselves, but all the people of this your Kingdom, may be 
speedily enjoined, upon some certain day or days, by your Majesty to be 
prefixed, by public fasting and prayer, to seek reconciliation at the merciful 
Hands of Almighty God, so that the prayers and tears of your whole King- 
dom, joined with your Majesties most Princely care, and the faithful and 
hearty endeavours of this^^ great Council now assembled, may procure 
glory to Almighty God in the preservation of his true Religion, much 
honour to your Majesty, prosperity to your people, and comfort to all 
your Majesties friends and allies. 

'against. Xi.is; r2-4. 

' ordered. '5'2,3,6,8-io. 

8 presented. X2,is. 

'reassembled. Xii. 

' great and urgent. Ti. 

"fear. Ti. 

* compassionate.'^ Xis; [rr;'^Cambridge, Gg. iv-13. 

commiserate and compassionate.iiX2. ^jg 
^0 dread. Xii.is. 
" your, added. Xi, 



18 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 27 

It was ordered that a conference shoiild be desired with the Lords 
about this Petition, who desired to join with the Lower House; which was 
done accordingly. 

The King sent a message by Secretary Coke to this effect, viz.. His 
Majesty understanding that the Remonstrance was called for, to take 
away all question, commanded me to deliver it to you; but hoping that 
you proceed with the Bill of Tonnage and Poundage and give precedency 
to that business, to give an end to further dispute between him and some^^ 
of his subjects; or else he shall think his speech, that was with good ap- 
plause accepted, had not that good effect he expected. 

But before this message was delivered, a report was made by Mr. Pym 
from the Committee of Religion, where a motion was made^^ about the 
Remonstrance the last Session concerning that part which toucheth Re- 
ligion, and the Clerk answered that by command from the King he de- 
livered it to the Lord Privy Seal, and so the Committee proceeded no 
further. 

Sir Walter Erle made a speech upon the occasion of Mr. Sec- 
retary Cokes declaring that his Majesty expected that the House should 
give his business the precedency as folio weth : 

Mr. Speaker, 1^ I am of the number of those that at our last meeting 
thought the time best spent in vindicating those rights and liberties of 
the subject which had formerly been impeached and were then in most 
eminent danger; and in that respect thought it not amiss (for a while) 
to postpone the business of Religion, as a thing that rather concerned the 
well-being than the being itself of this Kingdom and Commonwealth; 
being as an accident^^ without a subject, or a soul without a body. Now 
give me leave to tell you, that Religion offers itself to yoiu- first considera- 
tion at this time, challenging to herself the right of precedency, and the 
employment of our best endeavours. That as it was then, Uhi dolor ibi 
digitus, so it may be now, Ubi amor ibi oculus. But let no man mistake 
me, as though I were less sensible of the violations of the subjects liber- 
ties (even since the last Session) than any man else that sits here, what- 
soever he be. No, Mr. Speaker, I know full well that the cause of justice 
is Gods cause as well as the cause of Religion. But what good will those 
rights and liberties do me, or any man else, that resolves to live and die 
a Protestant? Nay, what good will they do any man, of what ReHgion 
soever he be, that resolves to live and die a freeman and not a slave, if 
Popery and Arminianism, joining hand in hand as they do, be a means, 

^between some. Xii.is; 'i'2,3,8,10; T; *. 

«» Mr. Pym came from the Committee for Religion and made a motion. X2,4,i3; 'I'i2. 
>* The last part of the Kings last message pressing us to begin with making of the Bill of Tonnage and 
Poundage calleth me up, added. Harl. 2217. 
" incident. Xio. 



January 27 TRUE RELATION 19 

together with the Romish Hierarchy, to bring in a Spanish tyranny amongst 
us ; under which those laws and Hberties must of necessity cease ?^^ In the 
point of ReHgion, you see what hath been done since the last Session;" 
we know what declarations have been made; what persons have been 
advanced; what truths estabhshed by laws confirnied by Synods national 
and provincial have been called in question, and that in such a manner as 
the like before hath scarce been heard of. Well, how others stand af- 
fected, I know not; but for my own part, that which for an undoubted 
truth I have from the Church of England heretofore received, that will I 
stand to, and forgo my estate, my Hberty, yea my life itself, rather than 
forgo it. As for passing of bills, settling revenues, and the like, without 
settling Religion, I must confess I have no heart to it. Take away my 
ReHgion, you take away my life; and not only mine, but the life of the 
whole State and Kingdom. For I dare boldly say, never was there (in 
the point of subsistence) a more near conjunction between matter of 
Religion and matter of State in any Kingdom in the world than there is 
in this Kingdom at this day. Therefore let this that I say sink a little 
into your consideration; and let me put you in mind of a saying worthy 
to be considered of, Humana consilia castigantur , uhi caelestihus se prae- 
ferunt;^^ when human counsels thrust themselves in before divine, a thou- 
sand to one but they are severely punished. But if we hold ourselves to 
this method by me now proposed unto you, doubtless that God which, 
beyond our expectations, brought us through those many^^ difficulties of 
the last Session, will not be wanting to us now in this particular, that so 
much concerns his own glory. However let us do our endeavours, and leave 
the success to him. The sum of all that I have said unto you is this, of 
all the businesses that are now before you, whatsoever they be, let Re- 
ligion have the precedency.^" 

Mr. Coryton. Let us not do Gods work^i negligently. We receive 
his Majesties messages with all duty; for our proceedings, let us so proceed, 

" Instead of, if Popery . . . , if we must not root out Popery and Arminianism, both which join hand 
in hand together in a Spanish tyranny under which our laws and liberties do suffer. Harl. 2217. 

»' If we consider what hath been done against the last Session of Parliament. Harl. 2217. 

>' Consilia bene gerantur ubi celestia se preferunt. Harl. 2217. 

»» main. *i. 

s» Sir Walter Erie replied to the message: The last part of the message calls me up. For point of pre- 
cedency. Religion ckallengeth precedency and the right of our best endeavours; Ubi dolor ibi digitus. I know 
justice and liberty is Gods cause, but what good will justice and liberty do if Popery and Arminianism join 
hand in hand together to bring in a Spanish tyranny, under which those laws and liberties must cease? What 
hath been done for Religion since the last Session? We know what declarations have been made, what persons 
have been advanced, what truths confirmed by all authority of Church, Councils, and King. For my part, I 
will forego my life, estate, and liberty, rather than my Religion; and I dare boldly affirm, that never was more 
corruption between Religion and matters of State, than is at this present time. Humana consilia castigantur ubi 
caelestibus se Praeferunt Let us hold ourselves to this method, and that God that carried us through so many 
difficulties the last Session, will not be wanting to us now. *2-n; T; *. 

*^ business. X1-5; *!. 



20 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 27 

as may soonest conduce-^ to his Majesties desires.^^ Religion concerneth 
the King as well as us. The unity of this House is sweet, especially in 
Gods cause. Let us cry and cry again for this.-^ Let us be resolved"^ 
into a committee, and presently debate thereof. 

Mr. Pym.26 

The hindrances of Religion to be inquired after for redress. '^^ Two 
diseases, the one old, the other new. The old Popery, the new Arminian- 
ism. There are three things to be inquired after concerning Popery. 

First, the cessation of the execution of the laws against Popery. 

Secondly, how the Papists have been employed and countenanced. 

Thirdly, the late bringing in and growth of superstitious rites and 
ceremonies amongst us.^^ 
For Arminianism be advised, 

First, that a way may be opened for the truth.-^ 

Secondly, that by^'' the Articles set forth 1552, and by the Catechism 
set forth in King Edward VI his days, and by the writings of Peter Martyr 
and Martin Bucer, Wy cliff e, and others, and by the constant profession 
sealed by the blood of so many martyrs as Cranmer, Ridley, and others; 
and by the 39 Articles set forth in Queen Elizabeths time; and by the 
Articles set forth at Lambeth as the doctrine of the Church of Eng- 
land, which King James sent to Dort and Ireland as the truth professed 
here. 

Third and lastly, by his Majesties Declaration and Proclamation^^ to 
maintain unity in the settled Religion, as appears by his Proclamation 
and other courses tending that way, which are perverted^^ and abused to 
the ruin and suppression^^ of Religion, which bred a fear of innovation; 
as also by the preferment which such have received since the last Session,^* 
who have heretofore taught contrary to the truth. Then to consider again 

S2 conduct us. V. 

^ to the good will and pleasure of his Majesty. Harl. 2217. 

^ again in his cause. Harl. 2217. 

^ resolved again. Harl. 2217. 

s' At the Committee for Religion Mr. Pym in the Chair. Xi-8. 

Mr. Pyms speech at a Committee. X13. 

Mr. Pym at a Committee. Xio. 
" This phrase put as the subject before Mr. Pym, in *ii; *2,6. 
*8 especially in Durham, as angels and saints, altars and candles, added. X9, 11,15. 
2« That any man may be here called in question for teaching against the truth. Harl. 2217. 
•0 Be advised how the Arminians have been employed and countenanced notwithstanding their doctrines 
have been divers times condemned for gross errors as appeareth by. Harl. 2217. 
•1 explanation and exclamation. Sloane 826. 
38 subverted. Xi-3.S. 
>^ subversion. ri,2,7,9,ii. 
M Parliament, all but Xn. 



January 27 TRUE RELATION 21 

to^^ what overt act^'' these men have been countenanced and advanced,^^ 
what pardons they have had for false doctrine, what manner of preaching 
hath been lately before his Majesty, what suppression^^ of books that have 
been written against their doctrines, what permitting'^ of such books as 
have been for them.^° 

The ways propounded for remedies. It is the duty of Parliament in 
general and of each Christian*^ in particular to use all possible means to 
redress these inconveniences. And howsoever it is alleged that the Par- 
liament are not judges in matters of faith, yet ought they to know*^ the 
established and fundamental truths, and the contraries unto them; for 
Parliaments have confirmed acts of General Councils, which have not 
been received until they have been so authorized; and Parliaments have 
enacted laws for trial of heretics by jury. The Parliament punished the 
Earl of Essex for countenancing of heretics; and there is no Court can 
meet with this mischief but the Courts of Parliament. The Convo- 
cation cannot because it is but a provincial Synod, only of the juris- 
diction of Canterbury, and the power thereof is not adequate^' to 
the whole Kingdom; and the Convocation of York may perhaps 
not agree with that of Canterbury, The High Commission cannot, 
for it hath its authority derived from Parliaments,'** and the de- 
rivative cannot prejudice the original, the judgment of Parliament 
being the judgment of the King and of the three estates of*^ the whole 
Kingdom.*^ 

It was then ordered that Religion should have the precedency*^ and 
that the particulars before named*^ should be taken into consideration by 
a committee of the whole House. 

«/or. ri.7.9.ii. 

by. Xg; Ta. 
" to what honours. Sloane 826. 
" committed and again advanced. Tg,ii. 
^^prohibiting. Ti, 2, 7,9,11. 
" printing. Sloane 826. 
*" for their errors. Harl. 2217. 
<i Christian Protestant. Had. 2217. 
*2 it may and ought to know. Sloane 826. 
" equal. Sloane 826, 

extended. X15. 
" other Courts. Sloane 826. 
« and so of. Sloane 826. 

« Instead of this speech: Let us inquire of sundry Popish ceremonies especially in Durham, as angels 
and other saints, altar, candles etc. X14. 
*' before all other matters, added. Xio. 
*' mentioned. Xi-8,io. 



22 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 28 

WEDNESDAY THE 28th OF JANUARY 

Secretary Coke delivered another^ message from his Majesty.^ 

His Majesty, upon an occasion of dispute in this honourable House 
about Tonnage and Poundage, was pleased to make a gracious declara- 
tion,^ wherein he commended unto us the speedy finishing thereof, and to 
give a precedency thereunto. And since his Majesty understands the 
preferring the cause of Religion, his Majesty expects rather thanks than 
a Remonstrance; yet his Majesty doth not interrupt you, so that you 
trench not on that which belongs not to you. But his Majesty still com- 
mands me to tell you that he expects precedency in Tonnage and Pound- 
age; assuring himself that he hath given no occasion to put it back, and 
so hopeth you will not put it off .^ 

Mr. Long. I cannot but much sorrow to see how we are still pressed 
to this point. ^ I hoped those near the Chair^ would have truly ^ informed 
his Majesty of our good intentions. But we see how unhappy we are, 
still some about his Majesty make him diffident of us. 

Sir Thomas Edmondes. I am sorry this House hath given occasion 
of so many messages from his Majesty about Tonnage and Poundage, 
after his Majesty hath given us so much^ satisfaction. You may per- 
ceive his Majesty is sensible of the neglect of his business; we that know 
this should not discharge our duties to you if we should not persuade you 
to that course which should^ procure his Majesties good opinion of you. 
Yourselves are witnesses how industrious his Majesty was to procure 
you gracious laws in his Fathers time; and since that, what enlargement 
he hath made of our liberties, and still we give him cause to repent him of 
the good he hath done. Consider how dangerous it is to alienate his 
Majesties heart from Parliament.^" 

Mr. Coryton. When men speak here of neglect of duty to his 
Majesty, let them know we know no such thing, nor yet what they mean. 
And I see not how we do neglect the same. I see it is in all our hearts 

January 28. 

1 a second. Xio. 

2 viz. it is the Kings answer to the Commons Declaration, added. X14. 
» answer or declaration. Xii. 

♦ Secretary Coke brought another message from his Majesty importing his Majesties desire to have them 
Proceed with the Bill of Tonnage and Poundage. Xi-8. 

• / cannot but with much sorrow speak seeing that we , . . *i. 
/ . . . still put back by these messages. Xs. 

« / hoped the Chair. Xi-S- 
''freely. X9. 
*fuii. Xi-io,is; *• 

\may. Xi-s. 
might. Xii. 
" us. Xis. 



January 29 TRUE RELATION 23 

to expedite the Bill of Tonnage and Poundage in due time; our business 
is still put back by these messages, and the business in hand is of God 
and his Majesty. Things are certainly amiss, and every one sees it, and 
woe be to us^^ if we present them not to his Majesty. 

Sir John Eliot spake to the same effect." 

It was ordered that a committee should be appointed to pen an answer 
to his Majesties messages, and to show that it is their resolution to give 
him all expedition in his service.^^ and that they hold it not only fit to 
give him thanks, but further to show what perils we are in; and that Ton- • 
nage is our own gift, and that it is to arise from our selves, and that we 
intend not to enter into any thing that belongs not to us. / 

THURSDAY THE 29th OF JANUARY 

The former part of the day was spent in debating of the transporta- 
tion of corn and victuals into Spain; and it was ordered that a message 
should be sent to his Majesty, that it is now evident that divers ships 
are bound for Spain and to desire a stay of them. 

In the afternoon the House sat at the Committee about Religion, and 
after long debate it was resolved by the Commons House of ParHament 
concerning Religion as followeth:^ 

That we the Commons now in Parliament assembled do claim, pro- 
fess, and avow^ for truth, the sense of the Articles of Religion, which were 
established in Parliament in the 13th year of Queen Elizabeth, which by 
the public acts of the Church of England, and by the general and current 
exposition^ of the writers of our Church, hath been delivered unto us; and 
we reject the sense of the Jesuits and Arminians* wherein they do differ 
from us. 

" and everyone sees that a woe will be to us. X1-4. 
12 and seconded Mr. Coryton, added. X12. 

in all points, added. Xii. 
^ business. X3. 

January 29. 

'<o declare their resolution in these words following, viz. *!. 
After the House sat a Committee for about Religion as followelh. r2. 
This heading added: 

The Resolutions of the House of Commons touching Religion. ■ir6,T, Fy; *2,6. 
A Declaration of the lower House concerning Religion. Xy.S.io. 
The Commons profession of their faith. Xis. 
s do declare, claim, profess, and avow. Tj. 
do claim, profess, and allow. X1-4. 

do claim and hold. St. P. Dom. 1628-29, vol. 133, no. 14. 
do proclaim, profess and avowe. Xis. 
» Propositions. Tii. 
* and all others, added. X9; St. P. Dom. 1628-29, vol. 133, no. 14. 



24 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 29 

The House received an answer from his Majesty touching^ the ships; 
which was, that he woiild consider of it, and send them answer^ in due time. 

Sir John Eliots Speech the 29th January 

Mr. Speaker,'^ I have always observed in the proceedings of this House, 

our best advantage is in order;* and I was very glad when that noble 

gentleman, my country-man,^* gave occasion to stay our proceedings, 

for I fear it would have carried us into a sea of confusion and disorder. 

, And having now occasion to present my thoughts to you in this great 

) and weighty business of Religion, I shall be bold to give you a short ex- 

j pression of my own affection, and in that order that, I hope, will conduce 

j best to the effecting of our work, and direct our labour unto an end. To 

\ enter. Sir, into a particular disquisition of the writings or opinions of 

\ divines, I fear it will involve us in a labyrinth that we shall hardly get out, 

and perchance hinder that way and darken that path, in which we must 

tread before we know what other men have declared.^'' It is necessary^^ 

that we should presently lay down what is the truth. And, as I presume, 

we come not hither now to dispute of Religion; far be it from the thoughts 

of the Church that hath thus long professed it now to dispute it. Shall 

posterity think that we have enjo^^ed our Religion fourscore years almost, 

^concerning. Xi-s.ii. 

'word. Xli; 'i'5; ri,3-9. 

^ Sir. *i; rii. 

8 to proceed in order, 'i'l. 

' Mr. Rouse my country-man. Xi-8. 

■0 This punctuation in X5, 11; Tr,?; Stowe 361; R.O. Roman Transcripts. 
New sentence begun with Before, ^i ; Thomason, E 198. 

^^ therefore, added. X1-3. 

• There has been a difference as to this allusion. Gardiner, who was inclined to rely upon the Verulam 
MS (Xi) accepted without question the addition found in all the Xi-8 MSS (Gardiner, vii, p. 37, n. r) 
and believed Mr. Rouse to be the "countryman" intended. Forster thought the reference was to Coryton 
(Forster, Life of Eliot, II, 210) probably because the Crew version ('i'l), upon which he depended, placed 
a speech by Coryton immediately before that by Eliot. Both Rouse and Coryton came from Cornwall, 
but it does not follow that either of them was referred to. It seems probable that Eliot meant to allude 
to the man whom he deemed the arch-enemy of the Puritan cause, the Lord Treasurer of England, who 
had represented Callington in the first parliament of Charles and Bodmin in the second. When Eliot 
spoke of "stay of proceedings," he was alluding to the fact that by the King's second message, the Com- 
mons had been prevented from meeting in Committee of Religion the day before. An examination of 
Eliot's own copy of his speech, as offered by Forster makes this point clear. Eliot says there: "I am glad 
that noble gentleman, my countryman, to the many excellent services he does, has added this: an inter- 
val of delay: this occasion to retard the course you were in." In the latter part of the speech it 
becomes even more evident that he is referring to the King's chief counselor. He alludes to "something 
lately declared" by which it is feared they "meant to deal with matters of faith." Here he is thinking 
of the King's phrase in his message, "Trench not on that which belongs not to you," and it was to that 
message he was going back in the first part of his speech. That message brought to his mind the man 
he deemed responsible for it, the Lord Treasurer, Richard Weston. He was taking this satirical way of 
alluding to the man who was causing most of the trouble for the Puritan party. On March 2nd he be- 
came even more bitter in his references to him. "I shall not feare to name the great Lord Treasurer in 
whose person, I fear, is contracted all the evill that we doe suffer . . . and I doubt not but to fixe it 
indubitably upon him: and so from the power and greatness of that person cometh the danger upon our 
religion" (pp. 259-60). 



January 29 TRUE RELATION 25 

and are now doubtful of the sense? God forbid. It may be, Sir, out of 
something lately declared,^^ j have not unnecessarily collected, that there 
is a jealousy conceived, as if we meant to deal with matters of faith. ^^ 
It is our profession; this is not to be disputed, neither will that truth be 
receded from this long time held; nor is truth decayed, it is confirmed by 
Parliament^* because it was truth. And in this,^^ Sir, before I come to 
deliver^^ myself more particularly, give me leave, that have not yet spoken 
in this great cause, to give some apprehension that I have of fear; for it 
is not in the Parliament to make a new Religion, nor, I hope, shall it be 
in any to alter the body of the truth which we now profess. ^^ I must 
confess, Sir, amongst all these fears we have contracted, there ariseth 
(as it seems to me) not one of the least dangers in the Declaration that is 
made and published in his Majesties name. And yet, Sir, notwithstanding 
this conclusion, exclusively let me say, that I may not be mistaken, what- 
ever in that or other things shall appear to carry mention of his Majesty, 
we have not the least suspicion or jealousy in^^ him. We have that com- 
fort in his piety and goodness, as if there be any misprision or error, I hope 
it is by those Ministers about him, which not only he but all Princes are 
subject unto. 

And to clear that, that Princes are subject to misinformation, and many 
actions may be entitled to^^ their names when there is no suspicion of it 
to be done by themselves, give me leave to look back to precedents of 
other times, and what I find in old^" stories may be useful in this. Anti- 
ochus. King of Asia, sent his letters and missives to his Provinces, etc. 
that if they received any dispatches in his name not agreeable to justice, 
Ignoto se literas esse scriptas, ideoque eis non parerent. I find by Plutarch 
of the great Antiochus of Asia, who saith, that Princes are obnoxious to 
abuses of Ministers, and yet it could not at all times be prevented; and 
therefore he sent messengers and letters to all his Provinces, that if there 

^^delivered. Xii.is; <5ii\ Ti,T, Stowe 361; E 198. 

^^that did not perhaps belong unto us, as to dispute of matters of faith, added. *i. 
" but if I be not much mistaken, it was confirmed by Parliament, added. Stowe 361. 
i»like'$'i; E 198, 

And as in this. Xr,3,5. 

And as this. Ti. 

And this. Stowe 361. 

And as thus. Ty. 
i» declare. Xi.s. 

>'tn any to alter that, which we have, nor can be, nor shal 'be in others to alter that body of truth that we 
now profess. Stowe 361. 
18 o/. '^i; Fi; E 198. 
^'justified in. '^l. 
20 like X2. 

other. X15; E 198. 

our. Xi,3, 10,11; ri.ii. 

written in those. *i. 



26 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 29 

were any^^ letters or dispatches sent under his name that came to them, 
that were not warrantable by law and agreeable to justice,^^ j^ should^* 
not be conceived^* to be done by him, and therefore they should not give 
way to it. Sir, I find it in another book, and I beseech you let it be ap- 
prehended, for I hope it shall clear some misprisions. ^^ Gratian did not 
only note and confess the same, but added the reason also, which the 
Masters of the Civil Law can testify from their books, wherein it is thus 
expressed, Quod in verecunda potentium instigatione principes saepe 
trahuntur, ut non concedenda concedant. Because that oftentimes with 
importunity of ministers and those about them. Princes are drawn to 
/great things by them not fit to be granted; as it was in that, so it may be 
I in this. I speak it to this end, to draw this conclusion, that if there be 
I any thing that carries the title, it may be the fault of his Ministers; far 
/ be it from me to have the least suspicion of him. 

And now to that particular in the Declaration, wherein I confess in 
me is an apprehension of more fear than I have in all the rest; for in the 
last of all the particulars^^ we heard what was said of Popery and Ar- 
minianism. It is true our Faith and Religion is in danger, but it is by 
degrees. Here, Sir, like an inundation it doth break in at once; that we 
are in danger to be ruined and overwhelmed; for I beseech you mark the 
ground of our Religion, it is contained in the body of these Articles. If 
there be any difference in the opinion concerning the sense and interpre- 
tation, the Bishops and the Clergy in the Convocation have power ad- 
mitted to them to do any thing that shall concern the continuance and 
maintenance of the Truth professed; which Truth being contained in 
these Articles, and these Articles being different in the sense, so as if there 
be any dispute about it, it is in them to order which way they please; 
and for aught I know. Popery and Arminianism may be a sense introduced 
by them, and then it must be .received. Is this a slight thing, that the 
power of Religion shotdd be left-^ to the persons of these men ? I honour 
their profession and their persons, ^^ but give me leave to say, the Truth 

SI messengers that, added. E 198. 

" Instead of and therefore he sent messengers .... and therefore he sent letters and missives under 
his name, that if any thing came unto them as from him which was not agreeable unto justice. Xi-3,S. 
^ could, ri.ii. 
'* counted. Xi. 
^ I shall clear from misprisions. X3; *i. 

/ shall clear some misapprehensions. Stowe 361. 
M kke Xi,2,s,io; Stowe 361 (except all our). 

last particulars. *i. 

all the particulars. T i , 1 1 , 

rest of the particulars. Xis; E 198. 
*'> must be drawn. Xis; *i; E 198. 

" and honour the calling in the reverend bishops that stands for the truth of our Religion, but not those that 
are the contrary in opinion. T?. 

and honour their calling in reverend bishop, but I honour not these men. ri.ii. 



January 29 TRUE RELATION 27 

that we profess is not mans but Gods, and God forbid that man shotild 
be made a judge of that Truth. Look upon the conclusion they have 
made, and from thence I draw their^^ arguments. I remember a character 
I have seen in a Diary of Edward VI, that young Prince of famous memory, 
wherein he doth express the condition of the Bishops and Clergy in his 
time, and saith, under his own handwriting, that some for sloth, some for 
age, some for ignorance, some for luxury, and some for Popery were unfit 
for discipline and government. Sir, I hope it is not so with us. Nay, 
give me leave to vindicate the honour of those men that openly show 
their hearts to the Truth. There are amongst our Bishops such as are 
fit to be made examples for all ages, who shine in virtue, like those two 
faithful witnesses in Heaven, of whom we may say that Elegy, which 
Seneca did of Caius, that to their memories and merits Ne hoc quidem 
obstet, quod nostris temporihus nati sunt. To whose memory and merit I 
may use the saying, that others faults are no prejudice to their virtue; 
who are so industrious in their works, that I hope posterity shall know 
there are men that are firm for the Truth. 

But, Sir, that all are not such, so free, sound, and orthodox in Religion 
as they should be, witness the men complained of, and you know what 
power they have. Witness the man nominated lately, Mr. Mountague. 
I reverence the order, I honour not the man; others may be named as bad. 
I apprehend such fear, that should it be in their power, we may be in danger 
to have our whole Religion overthrown. But I give this for testimony, 
and thus far to express myself and my Religion against all the power and 
opposition of these men; and whensoever any opposition of these men shall 
come, I trust we shall maintain the Religion we profess, for that we have 
been born and bred in it; nay, Sir, if cause be, in that I hope to die. 

Some of these. Sir, you know are Masters of Ceremonies, and they 
labour to introduce new ceremonies into the Church. Some ceremonies 
are useful; give me leave to join^" in one that I hold both necessary and 
commendable, that at the repetition of the Creed we should stand up, to 
testify the resolution of our hearts, that we would defend the Religion we 
profess; and in some Churches it is added, that they did not only stand 
upright with their bodies, but with their swords drawn; and if cause were, 
to defend our Prince, Country, and Religion, I hope we should draw our 
swords against all opposers. 

This I speak out of the care I have to preserve^^ the honour of our 
King against those who, I fear, by these innovations of ReHgion may 

" other. Stowe 361. 
"like Xis; *i; r7,9. 

join with you. Ti. 

add. X3. 
w maintain. *i. 



28 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 30 

have sought to undermine it. But to come to the manner and method 
of our proceedings, having made this excursion,^^ wherein, if I have trans- 
gressed the rule propoimded, I crave your pardon; I desire, to the end we 
may avoid confusion and distractions, that we go presently to the ground 
of our ReHgion, and lay that down a rule on which all may rest. Then, 
when that is done, it will be time to take into consideration the breakers 
and offenders against this rule.^^ But before we have laid down that, our 
work will be in vain. Therefore first lay down the proposition^^ wherein 
we differ from the Arminians, and in that I shall be ready to deliver my 
opinion, and this is my humble motion. 

FRIDAY THE 30th OF JANUARY 

Upon this day a Committee of the Lower House went to the King in 
the Privy Chamber with the Petition for the Fast, and the Archbishop of 
York, after he had made a short speech showing the occasion of their 
coming, presented it to his Majesty in the name of both Houses; to which 
the King answered as followeth: 

The Kings Answer to the Petition for the Fast. 

My Lords and Gentlemen, 

The chiefest motive of your Fast^ being the deplorable estate^ of the 
reformed Churches abroad is too true, and our duties are, so much as in 
us lieth, to give them all possible help; but certainly fighting will do them 
much more good than fasting. Though I' do not wholly disallow of the 
latter, yet I must tell you that this custom of Fasts every Session is but 
lately begun, and I confess I am not fully^ satisfied with the necessity of 
it at this time; yet to show you how smoothly^ I desire your business^ to 
go on, eschewing, as much as I can, questions or^ jealousies, I do willingly 
grant your requests herein; but with this note, that I expect that this^ shall 
not hereafter be brought into precedent for frequent Fasts, except upon 

*^ expression, X 1 1 , i s ; r i . 

^ in the next -place, &&&&&. Xio.ii.iS; Tii; Stowe 361. 
^profession. X1-3; io.ii.is- 
January 30. 

» Petition, ^i. 

2 state. Xi,2. 

'so fully. Xi.ii. 

* simply. Xi. 

^ our business. Xi,2. 

things. Xii. 
« and. Xi. 

all things that may cause. X15. 
Uhe same. Cambridge, Gg. iv-13, f. 98. 



February 2 TRUE RELATION 29 

great occasions. As for the form and time, I will advise with my 
Lords the Bishops, and then send you a particular answer to both 
Houses. 

MONDAY THE 2nd OF FEBRUARY 

The Lower House presented a Declaration^ to his Majesty in answer 
to two messages by him to them sent ; which Declaration f olloweth •} 

Most Gracious Sovereign, 

We have within these three days received from your Majesty two 
messages^ putting us in mind of our present entering upon the considera- 
tion of a grant of Tonnage and Poundage; but the manner of possessing 
the House therewith being disagreeable to our orders and privileges, for 
that and other weighty reasons* we could not proceed therein; and finding 
ourselves, in your Majesties name, pressed in that business, and that we 
should give precedency thereunto, we cannot but express some sense^ of 
sorrow, fearing lest the most hearty and forward affections, wherewith 
we desire to serve your Majesty, are not clearly represented unto you. 
Besides, such is the solicitous care we have of preserving ourselves in 
your Majesties most gracious and good opinion, that it cannot but breed 
much trouble in us, whenever we find ourselves (as now we are) enforced 
to spend that time in making oiir himible apologies (from whence usually 
do arise long debates) which we conceive might be very profitably em- 
ployed^ in the greater'' services of your Majesty and the Commonwealth, 
which we did with all diligence apply otirselves unto; and finding the 
extreme dangers wherewith our Religion is threatened, clearly presenting 
themselves to oiir thoughts^ and considerations, we thought, and do think, 
we cannot, without impiety to God, disloyalty to your Majesty, and 

February 2. 

' in form of a petition, added. Xio. 

2 with an apology for not passing the Bill of Tonnage and Poundage, and their desire to proceed with 
Religion, added. ■^6. 

Instead of this paragraph: 

The Commons apology . . . [rest like 'J'd above]. '*'I,S,6. 
The House of Commons presented this declaration following to his Majesty in answer to two messages 
by him sent. X12. 

i two several messages. Xi. 

* causes. Xi. 
s cause. Xi. 

6 like Xis; ■^i. 
spent. Xi,2. 
applied. Ti. 

• like Xi,2,is; Cambridge, Gg. iv-13, £. 98; St. P. Dom. 1628-29 vol. 133, no. 38. 
great, -in; n. 

» best thoughts. *i. 



30 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 2 

unfaithfulness^ to those by^" whom we are^^ put in trust, retard^^ o^j. pro- 
ceedings, until something be done to secure us in this main point, which 
we prefer even above our lives^^ and all earthly things whatsoever. 

And here we do with all humble thankftilness acknowledge your 
Majesties most pious care and princely intentions to suppress both Popery 
and Arminianism; the professors of the one being open enemies, and the 
maintainers of the other the more subtle and dangerous underminers of 
the true ReHgion of Almighty God estabUshed within your Realms and 
Dominions; the truth of which our holy Religion, or any part thereof, 
as being sufi&ciently known, and generally received here of all the members^* 
of our Church (except of some^^ schismatical persons which have of late 
years taken the boldness to broach their own contrary and corrupt 
opinions) we desire should not be called into doubt or question. But 
howsoever it hath pleased your Majesty (to our exceeding great comfort) 
by many testimonies to declare your own constant resolution to maintain 
the said^^ ReHgion; yet how yoiu- gracious piirposes are therein crossed, 
and into what a miserable condition your whole Kingdom is likely by that 
means to be reduced, we shall earnestly endeavour (as that which doth 
most nearly concern the safety and prosperity of your Majesty and people) 
in such sort to discover,^' that the ruin thereby threatened to both, may 
by Gods blessing be prevented; being most heartily sorry that these oc- 
casions are offered which do thus hinder our proceedings. And therefore, 
as well for the dignity and necessity of the matter, as for that we conceive 
it to be the most speedy and effectual way, by uniting^^ our hearts and 
endeavours, to dispatch all other businesses of importance (particularly 
those which seem more immediately to respecft your Majesties profit), we 
pray that our resolutions of preferring this business before all others may be 
acceptable to your Majesty, to whom both in the matter and manner of 
our proceedings, we desire to give all possible satisfaction. 

» unthankfulness. Ti. 
"like Xi,2. 

for. *!. 

from. Xis; Fi; Cambridge Gg. iv-i3, f. 98. 
" sent flnd, added. Xis. 
i' retract. Had. 2217. 
"like*i; ri. 

our selves. Xi,2. 
" Professed members. St. P. Dom. 1628-29, vol. 133, no. 38. 
» except only by some. St. P. Dom. 1628-29, vol. I33> no. 38. 

except of only some. X15. 
i>said true. St. P. Dom. 1628-29, vol. 133, no. 38. 

same. Xis. 
»' in such sort disordered. Ti. 
18 like Xis; Ti. 

by venting of all. "if I. 



February 3 TRUE RELATION 31 



TUESDAY THE 3rd OF FEBRUARY 

Secretary Coke reported^ that himself and the rest^ of the Committee' 
attended his Majesty upon Monday, and also further said:^ For my part 
I have used all diligence to do all the commands of my Master and of 
this House,^ and yet I find some exceptions have been taken at some words 
by me used when I delivered^ the Bill of Tonnage and Poundage. Indeed 
I used many arguments in speaking of^ his Majesty. I said it much con- 
cerned him, and that his Majesty much desired it; but this was mistaken, 
as if his Majesty had commanded it; and I had required it in his name, 
which I did not intend but to avoid dispute; and I said not this was an 
ordinary revenue, but that this Tonnage was a means to enable his Majesty 
to set his fleet to sea. 

After this apology, he read his Majesties Answer to the Declaration^ 
of the Lower House as f olloweth : 

Gentlemen, 

Your Declaration^ being somewhat long, may by reason thereof re- 
quire some time to reply unto it, since that (as most of you cannot but 
judge) this giveth me no satisfaction; therefore I shall give you some 
short notes upon it. I cannot think that, whereas you allege that the Bill 
of Tonnage and Poundage was brought in against the privilege of your 
House, that^° you will offer to take so much privilege from every" one of 
our members, as not to allow them the liberty to bring in any bill whatso- 
ever, though it be in your power, when it is brought in, to do with it what 
you think good. And I cannot imagine your coming together^^ Q^ly by 
my power, and to treat of things that I propound^^ unto you, can deny 
me that prerogative to commend^^ and offer any bill unto you; though in 

February 3. 

' After this declaration was read Secretary Coke reported. Xi,3. 

Secretary Coke reported after it was read. X13. 
s others. Xs. 
^for the service, added. Xs. 

* Secretary Cokes excuse. *5. 
6 cause, 'i'8. 

* declared. Xi. 
^for. Xi-8,io. 

* petition, 'i'l, 2, 4,6-11; T; *. 
» This Apology. *i. 

This Answer. Xi.is; Ti; Cambridge Gg. iv-13, f. 98. 
10 / wonder that. X2. 
M any. Xi,2,is. 
w hither. Xi. 

here. X2. 
1' expound. Cambridge Gg. iv-13, f- 98. 
i* recommend. X2,is; ^i. 



32 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 3 

this partictilar, I must profess/^ that this bill was not to have been offered 
unto you in my name, as that member of your House can bear me witness. 

As for the cause of delay of my business being Religion, there is 
none of you shall have a greater care for the true preservation of it than 
myself; which, since it is confessed by yoiu: Answer, you must either think 
I want power (which cannot be), or that I am very ill counselled, if it be 
in so much danger as you affirm. Though I may say much of this point, 
I will say no more, but that for all this I shall not stop my ears to you 
upon this subject, so that in form and matter you transgress not your 
limits. 

{* As for Tonnage and Poundage, I do not so much desire it out of 
greediness of the thing, being persuaded that you will make no great stop 
in it when you take it in hand, as out of a desire to put an end to those^^ 
questions that daily arise between me and some of my subjects; thinking 
it a strange thing if you should give ear unto those complaints, and not 
to take the sure and speedy way to decide them. Besides I must think 
it strange that this business of Religion should be only a hinderer of my 
affairs ; whereas I am certainly informed that all other things go according 
to their ordinary course. Therefore I must still be instant with you, that 
you proceed with this business of Tonnage and Poundage with diligence, 
not looking to be denied in so just a desire. And you must not think 
it strange^^ if I find you slack, I give you such further quickening as I 
shall find cause. ^ 

Sir John Eliot. 

Mr. Speaker, I confess this hath given*^ me great satisfaction for^' 
our present desires and future hopes ;^*' and howsoever I find the mis- 
interpretation of some, and^^ the danger of our Religion,^- yet I find that 
his Majesties ears are still open, and that if these things be thus as we see,^^ 
that then he^^ is not rightly cotmselled. I am confident we shall render 
his Majesty an account of what he expects.-^ But, Sir, I apprehend^^ a 
difference between his Majesties expression and the expression of his 

^^ confess. Ti. 
>« all. X2. 

^'' think much. Xi,2; *!. 

19 His Majesties Answer to our Petition concerning Religion hath given. Harl. 2217. 
>»<o. *6; rii. 

*^for the reformation of errors that are crept into our Religion, added. Harl. 2217. 
M«n. Xii.is. 

'* and howsoever I find a difference between his Majesties interpretation and the interpretation of his 
ministers. ^6. 

'''that Arminianism is so stiffly still maintained and other abuses still suffered, added. Harl. 2217. 
s< without doubt his Majesty. Harl. 2217. 
^expected. Harl. 2217. 

desires. Xis. 
!6jini. Xi.8.11,15; r2; Harl. 2217. 



Februarys TRUE RELATION 33 

Ministers ; for," Sir, that bilP^ was tendered here,-^ and again professed,^" 
in his Majesties name, and now we find that his Majesty disavows it, and 
that he did it not. What wrong is this done to his Majesty and to this 
House, to press things in the Sovereigns'^ name, to the prejudice and dis- 
traction of us all ? I think him not worthy to sit in this House.'* 

Mr. Speaker. This honourable person did explain liimself, that he 
did not press it in his Majesties name, but only commended it to your 
consideration. 

Secretary Coke. I said, that in regard of the difference between 
his Majesty and his subjects, my desire was to accommodate it. 

Sir Humphrey May. If you'' be too'^ quick to except against the 
Ministers of his Majesty that serve his Majesty and this House, '^ it will 
discourage and stop our'^ mouths, whose service you daily command.'^ 

At the Committee for Religion^^ 

Sir John Eliot. For the way of our proceedings, to show the 
weight and unity'^ to all the world,^° we have laid a good foundation. 
I collect, out of the late^^ dispute of the partictdars about the Articles of 
Lambeth, that the difference was in the manner of the^^ use of them, but 
all did profess the truth and worth of them. At which unity in^' all our 

*^ first. *i,3-S. 

"//»« Bill of Tonnage and Poundage. Harl. 2217. 

'»/o us. Harl. 2217. 

'"> pressed. X4,9. 

M Majesties. X3; *8; Ti, 5,7-9. 

•' place. T2. 

•• we. X3,9. 

**so. Xi-8: *S. 

"like Xi.2,4.9; *. 

the ministers of his Majesty and his household. 'J'9; r2-6,8. 

the ministers of his Majesty that serve his household. Ti. 

the ministers of his Majesty that serve his Majesty and his household. Ti i. 

the ministers of his Majesty that serve, and this House. X3. 

the ministers that serve his Majesty and his household. 'i'S,6,8. 

the ministers of his Majesty and this House. Xs; r7,9. 

his Majesties ministers that serve his Majesty and his household. Xi 1,-13. 
'« their. *5.6. 
*'' commend. Ti; *. 

" Then Sir John Eliot in the afternoon at the Committee for Religion made this speech. X14. 
'•dw/y. Xii.is. 

*o Instead of to all the world, therefore. Harl. 2217. 
"like X9,ii; Harl. 2217. 

last. Xi-8. 
"of the. Xii; *2,4.s. 

or. X2,4,5,io. 

about. *3 

and. Xi; Harl. 2217. 
*iwith. XI, II. IS. 



34 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 3 

hearts, we may rejoice; whereas the enemies abroad give out that we are 
at faction among ourselves; whereas all of us take them for granted, not 
only to make use of them to oppose our adversaries, but also for the worth 
of them. Let us boldly rely on the ground^ already laid. Let us look 
on-*^ them that have offended us in this our truth, which I hope we shall 
live in and die in if there be cause. Are there Arminians (for so they 
are properly called) ? look to those,** see to what degrees they creep.*^ Let 
us observe their books and sermons, let us strike at them,*^ and make ovs 
charge at them, and*^ vindicate our truth that yet seems obscure; and if 
any justify^" themselves in their new^^ opinions, let us deal with them, and 
then testimony^^ will be needful ; our truth is clear, our proofs will be many, 
and if these parties will dare^^ defend themselves,^* then seek for proof.^^ 

The Remonstrance of the last Parliament was read in part about the 
Arminians, and also his Majesties Declaration printed with^* the book of 
Articles, and the Proclamation against Mountague, Bishop of Chichester, 
for the suppressing of his book. 

Mr. Kirton. The two great Bishops named" are the main and 
great roots.^^ Let us inquire what men they have preferred.^^ 

Mr. Coryton. The Declaration now read^° came from his Majesty, 
but it is by the advice of some of his clergy;" and surely they have not 

** foundation. Harl. 2217. 
«like Xp.ii; *2.3- 

to. Xi-8,io; *i,4.S. 

out. Harl. 2217. 
*»this. Xis; *. 

♦' And for the Arminians {for so may our new upstart doctors of their doctrines be properly called) look 
to them, see to what degrees they creep. Harl. 2217. 
«8/e/ us search. Harl. 2217. 
«»/o. Harl. 2217. 

*" dare to justify. X15; Harl. 2217. 
*^ false. Harl. 2217. 
'2 and these testimonies. X. 
>» stand to. Harl. 2217. 
M will oppose them. X15. 

M it will be good for them to bring better proof if they can. Harl. 2217. 
MtK. Xii.is. 
•' viz., Mountague and Laud, added. X2,4. 

in the Remonstrance, nA&^A. Xi,3. 
'» of all those evils which are come upon us and our Religion, added. *i. 
•» they have presented. T/^. 

have been preferred. *2, 3, 5-7,9. 

have been preferred of the clergy, and how. *r,i2. 
" before mentioned. *6. 
•1 of some of his clergy, X2-S. 

of his clergy. Xii. l'2-ii. 

from his clergy. X9. 

of the clergy. *!. 

of his ministers, ri-6,8-12. 

from his ministers. Tt. 



February 4 TRUE RELATION 35 

advised®^ ^he right way, that no dispute of^' preaching must be one way 
or other, this is to suppress the truth; and yet the contrary profes- 
sors are preferred^* in the Church, to the grief of all good men. 

Sir Walter Erle. Mountague is a principal disturber of the 
Church. He was^^ a Bachelor of Divinity, I would know^^ how he came 
to be a Bishop. Two men are named in the last Remonstrance that are 
Privy Counsellours, and it is very probable that those ecclesiastical officers 
did give that advice to the King. 

Sir Humphrey May. I will let you know what I am privy unto.'* 
It is true those two were named in the Remonstrance; this point was 
pressed before the King and his Coimcil. The King did utterly dislike 
those novellers;^^ then were these two Bishops, with tears in their eyes, 
present, and protested they hated those opinions and the questions; and 
they renounced them upon their knees. 

Sir James Perrott. It is said that these two Bishops were before 
the Council on their knees, and with tears in their eyes did disclaim the 
opinions, but we see their facts. The Bishop of London, Doctor Laud, 
did entertain for his chaplain in his household one^" that did dispute the 
Arminian points, who said. What the Arminians hold and write, this I 
will maintain and do believe; this I will justify upon my oath.^^ 

It was ordered that the complaint against Mr. Mountague should be 
taken into consideration, and that a committee should make search after 
the pardons.'^ 

WEDNESDAY THE 4th OF FEBRUARY 

A Bill preferred that no clergy- 
man shall be in Commission for the 

" Atm, added, ^i. 

"or. Xa-is; r4,6,8,ir. 

M maintained and preferred. X3. 

« chief. XI. 

•« long since, added. *2. 

" would gladly know. Xi,3. 

would fain know. T5. 

desire to know. *!. 
88 / inill tell you what I am privy unto in this point. *!. 
** novelties, ^i-p.ii. 

'» *i leaves a blank space here for the name, 
"like X; *. 

And this Sir James offered to justify upon oath. *i. 

/ will maintain and justify upon my oath. ri,s,6,8,io. 

/ will maintain and justify: this I will justify upon my oath. r2, 3,4, 7, 9,11. 
'2 granted to the clergy, added, "ir. 



36 - COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 4 

Peace, except Bishops, Deans, Vice- 
Chancellors of both the Universities, 
etc. within their several jiirisdictions. 

Dr. Reeves which sat as judge 
upon the conservation [confirmation] 
of Mr. Mountague, called in and ex- 
amined, saith, That objections were 
offered ore tenus, and after offered 
in writing, but he rejected the same 
because they had not an advocates 
hand; and upon the whole saith, he 
durst neither admit of any objections 
for the present, nor give time for 
the same upon pain of praemunire 
by the Statute. 

Dr. Talbot and Dr. Steward are 
assigned for counsel with one Jones 
the printer in his cause. 

Mr. Selden. The point consid- 
erable is not whether Dr. Reeves 
hath done well or ill, for he did but 
as any discreet man woidd have 
done; but the point is now whether 
Mr. Mountague be a lawful bishop 
or no. Neither is the question to be 
debated whether the exceptions be 
lawful or no, but being legal of what 
force they be to hinder the confir- 
mation of a bishop. All which is 
agreed, and Dr. Reeves for the 
present is discharged. 

A Petition is preferred by Thomas A petition was^ preferred against 
Ogle against Dr. Cosin, with Arti- Cosin.^ 
cles annexed thereunto, tending to 
the introducing of Popish doctrine 
and Popish ceremonies into the 
Cathedral Church at Dvu-ham. 

Sir. Eubule Thelwall. There [See Feb. 6th. The House being. . . J 
were two affidavits that Cosin should 
say. That the King had no more 

February 4. 

» at the first sitting, added, 'i'l.ia. 

* against one Cosin. Xii; Ts. 

for divers crimes, added. *2. 



February 4 



TRUE RELATION 



37 



to do with Religion than his horse- 
keeper; and that by the appoint- 
ment of Mr. Attorney these affida- 
vits were taken, and he said, to the 
end a bill in Star Chamber might 
be filed against him. But since 
Cosin hath his pardon ; and the King 
was told it was only raised by the 
spleen of some Puritan. 

Mr. Shervile.^ Desired that 
search might be made for the par- 



Mr. Sherland* made report from 
the Committee about the search 



dons. There were four pardons for the pardons, that they found 
granted under the Great Seal to four pardons sealed, one to Bishop 
Mountague, Sibthorpe, Cosin, and Mountague, one to Cosin, one to 
Manwaring; it pardons all treasons. Dr. Manwaring, and one to Dr. 
praemunires, errors, erroneous opin- Sibthorpe. 
ions, and all false doctrines, scan- 
dalous speeches or books, and all 
offences by word and deed, all cor- 
rupt contracts, etc., treason to the 
person of the King and witchcraft 
only excepted. 

Mr. Rouse. Here are four per- 
sons that have made the Common- 
wealth sick; thus by the physic you 
see the diseases; but I conceive 
there is^ other physic to be minis- 
tered to those rotten members, for 
questionless this is not to be cured 
but by cutting of? those members. 

Mr. Kirton moved that the pro- 
curers of these pardons might be 
enquired after,^ that it might be 
seen who gave order to the Signet 
for the going^ forth of those par- 
dons, for questionless there are Co- 
sins at Court too. 

Sir Robert Phelips. If ever Sir Robert Phelips. If ever 
any King was abused, it was our there came here any business of 

J is no. #2,6. 

* found out. *2,3,6. 
^getting. *2,6. 

• According to both Nicholas (pp. 132, 139) and Grosvenor (p. 174). Sherfield was chairman of this com- 
mittee, field and vile were used interchangeably as the termination of a proper name ; many examples could 
be given. 



38 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 



February 4 



King in granting those pardons; we 
would save the time of doing any- 
thing if this be not searched* to the 
bottom. The goodness of our King 
is much abused. I desire Mr. At- 
torney may give account by what 
warrant he drew these pardons, so 
shall we find out those that misled 
the King to the heart-grief of us 
all. It is high time to find out all 
these things. 



A committee was hereupon named, 
to enquire who have been the solic- 
itors and procurers of these pardons. 

Sir Edward Giles. I know not 
what prevention may happen in 
this, for questionless the Devil of 
hell hath his hand in it. Therefore 



the like consequence, I have lost 
my memory. If ever King^ of Eng- 
land was abused in his mercy, it is 
our King. What persons are par- 
doned?* even the greatest enemies 
to the Church and State, that ever 
were standing under the judgment 
of Parliament, and they are par- 
doned between Parliaments. If every 
man be not warned to search this 
into the bottom, I would they were; 
if we neglect this, we regard nothing.* 
You see an offender^ complained of, 
and instead of punishment, grace; 
the goodness of our King is thus 
abused.^ Let a select committee 
consider of it, and let Mr. Attorney 
certify^ what is done,^ and by whom, 
and I hope we shall find those origi- 
naP" instruments who misled his 
Majesty. 

It was ordered that a subcom- 
mittee should have power to send 
for the records and Privy Seal, and 
other incidents" belonging to the par- 
dons, and to send for the parties, and 
also to send to Mr. Attorney about 
his knowledge herein, and by whose 



be searched. «a,6. 



' any king. X3. 
« preferred. Xi. 
■like ^1,12. 
/ would we should never regard anything. Xi-io, 
15; 'J'S.6,8-10; r2-4. 

same with if we did not regard this, added. 
Xi.g.io. 

/ would we would never regard anything. Xii.is; 

'j'2,3.7.11; rs,8.ii. 

/ would we might never regard anything. ri,6,7, 
9>io. 
* offenders. *i,i2. 

officers. Xi. 
' much abused. X3. 
» signify. r2-4. 
» herein, added. 'J'1,12. 

^0 find out the whole pack of their benefactors and 
countenancers, and who are the original. X3. 
" instruments. Ti.v-io. 
other records incident and. Xii. 



February 4 



TRUE RELATION 



39 



presently let us send for Mr. Attor- 
ney. Which was ordered. 

Sir James Perrott complaineth 
further of some' instruments of the 
Bishop of London and Dr. Turner, 
who denied the license of printing 
the Articles of Ireland; that divers 
books have been desired to be li- 
censed^ by the Bishop of Londons 
chaplains, and they refused^ the 
same, declaring they are of a con- 
trary opinion, and have given li- 
cense to Mr. Cholmley and Mr. But- 
terfield, and therefore would not 
give license to these. 

Mr. Pym doth make a full re- 
port of all the proceedings against 
Mr. Mountague, since the last Par- 
liament of King James. 

Sir Robert Phelips reported 
from Mr. Attorney, that my Lord 
of Dorset spoke to him to hasten 
the pardons, and that he received 
a warrant from the King for draw- 
ing them; that my Lord Carleton 
brought another warrant from the 
King for drawing these pardons, 
telling him, that he must make 
expedition therein, and^ he must 
draw the same as the Counsel of 
the parties did direct the same. 
That Mr. Attorney having made a 
rough draft, being often urged to 
expedition by the Bishop of Win- 
chester, he sent the same to the 
Bishop, who interlined and corrected 



signification^^ ^\^q pardons were ob- 
tained; which was done accordingly. 



Sir Robert Phelips made re- 
port that he went to Mr. Attorney, 
and found him in the Star Cham- 
ber, and acquainted him with the 
message. He answered, that he 
received a command from his Maj- 
esty in the last long vacation, pres- 
ently after the end of the last 
Session, to draw a pardon; and 
delaying^' it until Michaelmas term,^* 
he said that he met with the Bish- 
op of Chichester, ^^ who intimated 
unto him his Majesties favour,^® 
and requested^^ him to draw his^* 
pardon. Mr. Attorney said he de- 
sired him to advise him whether it 
would be any advantage to him or 



• the same. *3- 

• have been licensed. 
' then refuse. *i. 

• for, y *2. 
found, *6. 



>' sollicitation, Xi,2. 

" deferring. T2-A. 

^* following, added. 'I'i,i2. 

» Winchester, ^z.s.e.S.g; r2-4,6. 

>• pleasure, *i,i2. 

^1 required. Xii.is; *I,3.8,I2. 

"</»«. 'J'I,S,I2. 



40 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 



February 5 



the same, adding the names of Co- 
sin, Manwaring, and Sibthorpe to 
the pardon. 



That Mr. Attorney may be asked 
whether any of these Lords were 
made acquainted with the affida- 
vit about Cosin. A messenger is 
sent to the Lord Keeper, to know 
the reason wherefore he made stop 
of the Great Seal to those pardons, 
and by what solicitations he was 
prest thereunto. 



no. Afterwards^^ he met with a 
great Lord and a Privy Counsellor 
(the Earl of Dorset) who asked him 
if the pardon for the Bishop of 
Chichester-" were drawn, and de- 
sired him to dispatch it. After this, 
he said, the Lord Charlton sent to 
him a warrant under the Kings 
hand to command him to draw the 
pardon,2i ^hich he did; and sent it 
to the Bishop of Winchester,^^ who 
interlined it.^^ And whereas^* the 
pardon was but for one, he put in 
four, Mountague, Cosin, Sibthorpe, 
and Manwaring. 



THURSDAY THE 5th OF FEBRUARY 



A petition in complaint of an 
imposition^ upon malt by the City 
of London, was this day preferred 
to the House, which is referred^ to 
the Committee for Grievances. Some 
differences being observed in the 
articles, as in the twentieth article. 



February 5. 
' set, added. *3. 
' preierrtd. 4>i,2,6. 



'• Afterwards Mr. Attorney told him. *1,I2. 

" Winchester, -i-a, 5,6,8,9. 

»» commanding him to dispatch it. X3. 

"Chichester. Xi-10,15; *IS. 

« and after it was drawn, the Bishop of Winchester 
sent to see it, and interlined it. *!; '4'I2 (except 
Chichester). 

** Mr. Attorney had drawn, added. *I,I2. 



February 5 



TRUE RELATION 



41 



etc., a Committee is to compare 
the old and new articles with the 
records at Lambeth, and consider 
how all those differences come in. 

Mr. Long complaineth, that a 
prosecution hath been against him 
in the Star Chamber for sitting in 
this House the last Session, he be- 
ing High Sheriff of Wiltshire, and 
being chosen burgess of Bath in 
Somersetshire. 

This business is ordered to be 
debated on Monday next. 

Secretary Coke saith, he hath 
very now received from a noble 
person this message from his Maj- 
esty, that he hath appointed the 
eighteenth of this month for the 
Fast for this place, and the twentieth 
of next month for the whole king- 
dom. 



The preachers are to be chosen 
tomorrow at the Committee for 
Religion. 

Mr. Ogle is called, who averreth 
his petition, and will prove the 
same by witnesses. 

It is ordered, that Cosin shall 
have intimation to attend to answer 
here if he will on Monday come 
fortnight, to be sent for by a Ser- 
jeant at Arms, and if he be not 
in^ the Convocation; but if he be, 
then to have notice by the Speakers 
letters, and if thereupon he appear 
not, then to proceed with him as 
is usual in the like case. 



Secretary Coke brought the 
Kings answer^ concerning the Fast, 
viz., That it was his Majesties 
pleasure, that the Fast shovdd be 
kept by both Houses of Parliament 
and for the cities of London and 
Westminster on the eighteenth day 
of this instant February, and for 
the whole kingdom the twentieth'' 
of March next. 



' of. *I. 



1 to the House, added. Ti 
il9th. Xp. 



42 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 



February 6 



If witnesses be sent for to this 
House in any public business, they 
are to bear* their own charges. 

Sir Robert Phelips moveth in 
the behalf of the Lord Purcy, that 
having a cause in dispute in the 
Lords House, and three members of 
this House being of his counsel, de- 
sires they may have leave^ to plead 
his cause. Which being conceived 
to be a cause^ that is not to receive 
any judgment here, it is granted. 



FRIDAY THE 6th OF FEBRUARY 



A petition exhibited against one 
Wittington a Papist in Northum- 
berland. 



Ordered to be sent for by a Ser- 
jeant at Arms. 

Mr. Harris of St. Margarets 
Westminster, Mr. Harris of Han- 
well in Oxfordshire, Mr, William 
Fitz-Jeoffery of Cornwall, are 
chosen for three preachers for the 
day of the Fast, and for the pre- 
cedence it is referred to the preachers 
themselves. 



One Witherington was petitioned 
against,^ who had formerly been 
examined before the Lords of the 
Council,'^ for depraving of our Re- 
ligion, oftentimes calling^ the Prot- 
estants heretics, wishing that a 
hundred of their throats were cut; 
and to one that had been a Papist, 
and was lately turned to our Re- 
ligion, he said, He would be hanged, 
and otherwise disgraced him. 

It was ordered that he should be 
sent for. 



4 pay. *i. 

' whom he desires may have liberty, *3. 

« case. *3. 

February 6. 



' The House being informed by petition against one 
Witherington. *i.i2. 
» Privy Council. ■96. 
» and had since called. '*i,i2. 



February 6 



TRUE RELATION 



43 



Mr. Shervile reported, one Par- 
son Scall^ procured'* the pardon for 
Mountague, one Bartholomew Bald- 
win solicited the pardon for Man- 
waring. There is also another par- 
don found to be granted to Man- 
waring, pardoning the judgment 
lately given by the High Cotut of 
Parliament, and all sums due to 
the King thereby. 

Sir Nathaniel Rich. That we 
may do somewhat that may give 
contentment to those who sent us 
hither, and make expedition to the 
business of his Majesty and the 
Commonwealth; that therefore the 
business of Mr. Mountague may be 
expedited to the Lords, that they 
may enter into these things as well 
as we. 

The Counsel of Mr. Jones the 
printer are to be heard upon Mon- 
day next, 

[See Sir Eubule Thelwall on Feb- 
ruary 4.] 



Sir Robert Phelips reported 
from the Committee sent to Mr. 
Attorney, that Mr. Attorney said 
for the affidavits taken by Sir Eu- 
bule Thelwall, that one Heath, a 
gentleman of Grays Inn, told Mr. 

» SkM. *3. 
* solicited. ^2,3. 



The House being informed^ about 
two days ago that, a little before 
Cosin obtained his pardon, he was 
accused to Mr. Attorney by two 
witnesses for speaking words against 
the King;^ whereupon Sir Robert 
Phelips and others were sent to Mr. 
Attorney about it. 

Report was made by Sir Robert 
Phelips unto the House as followeth: 

Sir Robert Phelips. My part 
is to give you an account about' 
the affidavits against Cosin, and 
the diversion of the cause^ against 

* 651 Petition, added. *s. 

'/or saying in a public meeting that the King had 
nothing to do to be head of the Church, and that he 
had no more power to excommunicate than his servant 
that rubbed his horses heels. *s. 

6 concerning. X2-4. 

''course. X2,5,9,ii; *3,5,6,9; T2-\2. 



44 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 



February 6 



Attorney that Cosin should say, 
that the King was not supreme head 
of the Church, and that he had no 
more to do with ReHgion than he 
that rubs his horses heels. Mr. At- 
torney acquainted the King hereof, 
whereupon the King charged him to 
make a strict inquisition herein; but 
the King would not believe the same 
to be true. Mr. Attorney sent for 
his kinsman again, and being ex- 
amined again he said so, as the affi- 
davits were made thereon. There 
was fiirther certificate from the 
Dean and others at Durham, so that 
the business was much lessened 
thereby; but Mr. Attorney pressing 
the business further,* casually met 
with the Bishop of Winchester, who 
said to Mr. Attorney, that this 
business would come to nothing, and 
King, that made the affidavit, was 
but a vain fellow. 



him in the Star Chamber. Mr. 
Attorney said that one Mr. Heath of 
Grays Inn came to him about Mich- 
aelmas Term,^ and affirmed that 
Cosin in a public meeting^ said, 
that the King had nothing to do to 
be head of the Church, and that he 
had no more power to excommimi- 
cate than his servant that rubbed 
his horses heels. The Attorney ac- 
quainted his Majesty therewith, but 
his Majesty was not willing to be- 
lieve that any man would dare to 
say so much, but that^" the com- 
plaint did arise from malice. Yet he 
charged the Attorney to make a 
careful inquisition^^ thereof, and if 
it were strongly proved,^^ that then 
he would repair to his Majesty. 
Mr. Attorney did again inquire after 
this business, and said unto Mr. 
Heath that the matter is found foul 
and very improbable, there is some 
mistake in it. Thereupon there 
were two affidavits taken, and they 
did swear it point blank. Yet^^ Mr. 
Attorney sent his letters to Mr. 
Deane and others that were present 
when the words were spoken,^* to 
require them to certify whether the^* 
words were spoken or no. Upon 
that^^ certificate there was found 



' iai«, added. •iri,i2, 

* audience. V2-/^. 
>« tut conceived that. 'J'1,12. 
^^disquisition. Xi,3,9,ii,is; «'2-S,7-ii; T, 
" probable. X; *r,3,S,6,8,9; r2,S,6. 
i' Nevertheless. ^1,12. 
'* at the same time. r2-4. 
^^ such. 'J' 1, 1 2. 
^* their. *i,i2. 
» Mr. Attorney was not pressing the business, but instead had dropped it. See the parallel account, 
also Grosvenor (pp. I74-7S) and Nicholas (p. 130). 



February 6 



TRUE RELATION 



45 



The affidavit of Thomas King 
was read, which verifieth the same. 

Mr. Selden made the rest of this 
report, and dehvered the warrant by 
which Mr. Attorney drew the par- 
dons for the Bishop of Winchester. 
The effect was, that what Mr. 
Motmtague had done or writ was 
not out of any ill meaning; such a 
pardon should be drawn as Mr. 
Mountagues Counsel should direct. 
This warrant was imder the Lord 
Dorchesters hand, being the Lord 
Carleton. 

Mr. Selden delivered likewise the' 
copy of the pardon interlined and 
razed by the Lord Bishop of Win- 
chester. 

Sir John Eliot. Here is high 
treason upon oath, a deposition up- 
on oath, an opposition'' is not in law 



some variance about the^^ words, 
and thereby the business was les- 
sened. And being demanded^^ if^' 
he had directions from any to de- 
sist,2° he said,2^ No; but casually 
he met with the Bishop of Winches- 
ter,22 and he told him of the com- 
plaint.23 The Bishop said,^^ it will 
be nothing, for King, one of them 
that made^^ the affidavit,^^ is a bag- 
gage-fellow. 



Sir John Eliot. It is our hon- 
our and duty not to pass these 
things over too slightly. I find^^ the 



a. $3. 



>> This should read a deposition . 



"these. *i. 
^'^ asked. XI I ; r6. 
i» whether. Xi,3. 

" any directions to desist from the suit intended 
the Star Chamber against Cosin. *I,I2. 
^answered. *I.I2; Ts. 
n Chichester. Xi-s; *I2. 
M said business. *I,I2. 
« To which the Bishop answered. *i,i2. 
^ that one that made. Xii. 

one that made. XiS; *3,S-9. 
*• one of the defendants, T2-4. 
" said. Xi. 
in opposition. See Grosvenor (p. 17s). 



46 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 



February 6 



to be admitted ; for here is not only 
an admission, but an invitation of* 
certificates for defence, and allowed 
to sway the case^ of so high a nature; 
that therefore the parties that made 
the affidavits and Mr. Attorney 
may be examined, to make a better 
disquisition in this, for I fear the 
intimation^ of the Bishop of Win- 
chester swayed too far with Mr. 
Attorney. Be the matter true or 
false the neglect of the duty of Mr. 
Attorney is not to be' excused. I 
am much grieved to see his Majesties 
mercy run so readily to these kind 
of persons and his justice so readily 
upon others, trifling occasions, nay 
upon no occasions, only the misin- 
formation of some Minister. 



Kings honour and his right is in 
question which we are all sworn to 
maintain .^^ If I mistake not, it is 
high treason; and that proved 2' 
upon oath, and presented unto 
the Attorney. His Majesty was ac- 
quainted with it, who gave com- 
mand to examine it, and the At- 
torney was to certify his Majesty .^° 
In ordinary felonies the law doth 
not allow oaths contrary to the pro- 
ceedings for^^ the King ;here,^2 against 
two affidavits, a letter and a certif- 
icate must dash them all. The 
Attorney informed^^ the Bishop of 
Winchester^* with it, who said he 
heard of such a complaint against 
Jack Cosin but it was upon malice.^^ 
Let^^ the persons^' that made these 
affidavits be sent for,^* and let Mr. 
Attorney be sent for to answer why 
he passed the matter over so slight- 
ly. Consider the person of the man 
in question, who was not only sus- 
pected, but charged as criminous, 
and one that is so obnoxious. 

It was ordered that the witnesses 
should be sent for. 



to. *3,S. 

* cause. 4>3. 

• invitation, #3. 

' excluded nor, added. 



2' maintain, only in *i,i2. 

2» by two witnesses, added. *2. 

"> and this was given upon oath, presented by the 
Attorney to his Majesty, who gave him command to 
examine it, and then to certify his Majesty of it. 

*I,12. 

'» of. X5; *2. 

against. Xi. 
^ but here. *i,i2. 
** acquainted. Xii; Ty. 

acquaints. *I,I2. 
3« Chichester. Xl-8; -^12. 

" who takes it to be but a matter of malice. *i,i2. 
3« / desire. *I.I2. 

He moved that. -fS- 
" parties, ■irs; Tii. 
38 may be sent for and examined. *i,i2. 



February 7 



TRUE RELATION 



47 



Mr. Attorney being by writ to 
attend the Lords House, cannot be 
enjoined to attend this House, or to 
appear upon^ warrant; wherefore 
Mr. Littleton and Mr. Selden, be- 
ing of the same Inns of Court, have 
undertaken to give notice to Mr. 
Attorney, that there being an accu- 
sation against him, he may here 
answer and satisfy the House on 
Monday next. 



It was moved^^ that Mr. Attorney 
should be^° sent for, but they made 
a question whether they could send 
for him or no, if^* he attended by 
writ in the Lords House. There- 
upon it was ordered that intimation 
should be given him to be there on 
Monday next to give satisfaction 
to the House for his not proceed- 
ing against Cosin, having two affi- 
davits that he spake the words that 
were objected against him.^ 



SATURDAY THE 7th OF FEBRUARY 

A bill against spiritual simony, 
and a bill against buying or selling 
of places of judicatiire. 

Mr. Kirton moved, that a time 
may be appointed to take into con- 
sideration the business of Tonnage 
and Poundage. 

Sir Walter Erle secondeth 
the motion, that all the world may 
know that we will give to God those 
things that be Gods, and to Caesar 
those things that be Caesars, and 
to our Country those things that 
be theirs. 

Mr. Waller moved, that the 
merchants may have their goods, 
and that his Majesty may be moved 
therein. 

It was ordered that on Tuesday" 
next, the House, in the Committee, 
shall take into consideration the 
business of Tonnage and Poundage, 
and all things incident thereto, 

«6y. *a,6. ^* ordered. *8.9. 

<" have been. X2-S. 
« because. *i,i2. 

« having as good a ground for it. *!. 
February 7. 
^Thursday. Grosvenor p. 177; Nicholas p. 132; C.J. 1:927. 



48 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 7 



Mr. Shervile is nominated to take 
the Chair of the Committee. 

Sir Robert Phelips reported 
from the Committee for Course^ of 
Justice: A petition of complaint 
was exhibited by Mr. Noy,*= a 
member of this House, against Sir 
Ed. Mosley, Attorney of^ the Duchy 
Court, and his man, in point of 
injustice ;2 that Mosley covenanteth 
that his man Brograve should have 
80 pounds, and then he should have 
an injunction; but the Chancellor 
having intimation thereof prevented 
the same, yet after by covenant, 
Mosley procured his man 50 
poimds; that this was an ordinary 
course, citeth many particulars,' 
that Mosley would in his private 
chamber add to orders, or detract 
from them, or that was for the 
King, or against the King, as men 
would come to him. 

This is referred to a Committee 
to be examined. 

Mr. Selden, reported from the 
examination of Allen, for so much 
as concemeth the privilege of this 
House, by the first and third article 
against him. This justified by a 
letter written by Allen to Mr. Bar- 
ton, the Puritan faction denied 
supply like water-men provoked 
to war, rowed another* way; for 
his author in^ this he produceth a® 

> in. *3. 

^justice. *2,6. 

• precedents. *3. 

* the other. *2,6. 
*of. 91. 

*the. *2,3,s,6. 

^Courts. Grosvenor p. 177; C.J. 1:927- 

*Noell. Grosvenor p. 177. Nowell. C.J. 1:927. 



February 7 TRUE RELATION 49 

book set forth by King James, in 
the 19th year of his reign, page 13,' 
to show how the Puritan faction be 
clear, by^ mentioning the particu- 
lar members of the Commons House, 
and page 5, etc. in the same page 
all which they cloak with Religion; 
and when he had boldly insisted on 
this,^ he said, I pray note it, It is 
not this Parliament I speak of, it 
was another. 

Sir Robert Phelips. That he 
may be sent to the Tower, and 
that he may stand in some public 
place, with a paper declaring the 
cause, or such other punishment 
as the House shall think fit. 

Mr. Pym. That other matters of 
greater importance being under ex- 
amination, he may for the present 
rest in custody, and I doubt not 
but there is matter sufficient to 
inflict further punishment. 

Ordered that Allen shall first 
answer his contempt at the Com- 
mittee for Religion, on Monday 
next. 

Mr. Shervile. That the Com- 
mittee for Pardons is sine die, there- 
fore he moveth for another day. 
Whereupon it is ordered that they 
shall meet^" this afternoon. 

Mr. Selden reported the draft 
of Mr. Mountagues interlined par- 
don, concerning the additions more 
than an ordinary Coronation par- 
don, except sundry causes depend- 
ing in the three Courts in West- 
minster-hall, and the High Com- 
mission Court. For Manwaring, all 

' page the 11 and 13th. *3,S. 

page 10 and 13. $2,6. 
> clearly, added. *3. 
« these. $1. 
'« all, added. *2,6. 



50 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 



February 7 



offences for times past and times 
to come. 

Sir John Stanhope moveth, that 
Mr. Lynne,*^ a member of this House, 
and secretary to the Bishop of Win- 
chester, may look on the pardon, 
and be enjoined to declare whether 
he know the hand or no. 

Mr. Lynne declareth the inter- 
lined particulars to be part his 
Lords hand and part his own hand 
by his Lords command; yet some 
of the interlined particulars he 
knew not the hand. 

Sir Nathaniel Rich thanked 
this gentleman for dealing so clear- 
ly with the House, and saith, for his 
encouragement, he deserveth thanks 
from the whole House. 

Sir John Eliot moveth. That a 
select committee may extract a 
charge against the Bishop of Win- 
chester, that we may have judg- 
ment against him. 

Sir Daniel Norton. That a 
Doctor of Divinity, in the Bishop 
of Winchesters diocese, being a 
very grave divine, Dr. Moore, the 
Bishop of Winchester said to him, 
he had often heard him preach be- 
fore the Kings Majesty against Po- 
pery, which was very pleasing to the 
King, but now he must not. The 
Doctor answered that he must if it 
comes his way: said the Bishop, 



\See speech given at end of day. ] 



Sir Daniel Norton^ informed 
the House, that one Dr. Moore at- 
tending the Bishop of Winchester,^ 
upon an^ occasion the Bishop told 
him, that he had oftentimes heard 
him preach before King James, and 
that he used to preach against Po- 
pery, which he said was well liked 
of them, but now (said he) you must 
not do so. Whereupon the Doctor 
said,* that if occasion served, he 



^Lively. Grosvenor p. 179. 



» Sir Dudley North. 
Dr. North. X13. 
^Chichester. X3. 
» some. X3. 
* answered. \['r,i2. 



I 



February 7 



TRUE RELATION 



51 



you must not; and further your 
tables in the choir stand as in ale- 
houses. The Doctor replied, they 
stood according to law: said the 
Bishop, there be Articles to the 
contrary: said the Doctor, the Reg- 
ister found it contrary, saying. 
Your tables at Winchester stood as 
altars. 

Sir Robert Phelips. Thus you 
see how truth in the discovery doth 
grow upon us. And now you see how 
the introducing ceremonies at Dur- 
ham doth arise; and now you see^^ 
the greatest aspersion laid on his 
Majesty that ever I heard of; and 
now I am confident the Bishop of 
Durham procured the Kings hand 
to the pardons. 

Chancellor of the Duchy. This 
trencheth high to^^ the person of 
the King, and I am glad to hear 
it,^' and shall be more glad to see 
it proved. 

Sir Thomas Heale saith, he 
heard these words from Dr. Moores 
own mouth; and asking him if he 
would prove this in Parliament, he 



would not spare to do the like now.^ 
To whom the Bishop further re- 
plied, then® the times were^ not the 
same, and therefore now you must' 
not.9 



Sir Robert Phelips said. By 
this you^" may guess^^ that this 
Bishop® had a hand in setting up 
those ceremonies in Durham, and 
that he beafs^^ good will towards 
them, labouring to make Durham 
and Winchester synonymous. This 
reflects upon his Majesty as if his 
Majesty should not be pleased^^ 
that men^* in their preaching^^ 
should^^ refel and repel Popery. 



^^ see how. *2. * still. ^1,13. 

i^upon. *2. ^that. Xis; '*'r,3.S.6.9.i2; r3-7,9,i2. 

"of it. ^2. omitted Xi-4; Ta. 

' are. Xr-4. 

* may. Xii. 

•do so as you have done, added. *i2. 

» we. X3. 

"we. Xi,4; *6. 

^^ still bears. ^i,i2. 

" were not pleased. Xii. 
should dislike. *i,i2. 
should be pleased. Xg; ^2,3.5-9- 

>* ministers. *i. 

" proceedings. ^3. 

i» should not. Xp.ri.is; *2,3,s-9; r4. 
' i.e. Neile formerly Bishop of Durham and at this time of Winchester. 



52 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 



February 9 



said, he would maintain it with 
his life. 

Mr. Valentine saith, That this 
Bishop hath a chaplain in Gran- 
tham, that preached they were all 
damned that refused the loan," and 
that he hath made a great combus- 
tion in placing the Communion 
Table there. 



The Speakers letter is to go for 
Dr. Moore. 



Sir John Eliot. In this Lord" 
is contracted^^ all the danger^^ we 
fear; for he that procured those 
pardons, may be'^" the author of 
these new opinions. And I doubt 
not but that his Majesty being in- 
formed^' thereof, will leave him to 
the justice of this House; and I 
hope these exhaltations will not 
raise jealousies betwixt his Majesty 
and us. Let the Doctor be sent 
for to justify it; which was ordered 
accordingly. 



MONDAY THE 9th OF FEBRUARY 

A petition was preferred in complaint of' the postmasters^ patent of 
London, which is referred to a committee. 

Mr. Speaker delivered from Mr. Attorney a narration^ in writing of 
his proceedings in Cosins business.'* 

Sir John Eliot reported from the Committee for the examination of 
the merchants business, that the Committee finding^ Sheriff Acton in* 
prevarications and| contradictions in his examination, which being con- 



i«/orr 



February 9. 

1 delivered in against. *i,i2. 

customers. Xi-8,io; *i. 
^warrant. Xi; *i-3. 

♦ Proceedings against Cosin. X5. 

* how they had found, 'i'l.ia. 
*S0 many, added. *2,5. 



1' Laud. *i 

18 hatched and contracted. Fi.S.io. 

" evil. X3. 

^0 for he hath procured those pardons which may 

r. 

" truly informed. X9. 



I 



February 9 TRUE RELATION 53 

ceived to be a contempt to^ this House, desires he may^ be sent for to 
answer his contempt.^ 

Mr. Goodwin. The Sheriff acknowledgeth his error and humbly 
desireth so much favour, that he may once again be called before the 
Committee; and if then he give not full contentment^" by his answer, 
he will refer" himself^^ to the wisdom and justice^^ of this House. 

Mr. Waller^^ seconded this motion, so did Alderman Moulson, 
Secretary Coke, Chancellor of the Duchy, and some others ;^^ but his 
offence being declared to be so great and gross, and that the Committee 
had given him so many times to recollect himself,^® and he being so great 
an officer of so great a city, he had all the favour that might^' be, and yet 
rejected the same, and carried himself in a very scornful manner.* Where- 
fore it was ordered that he should be sent for tmto the House as a delin- 
quent, to-morrow morning. ^^ ^ 

Jones, the printer,^^ and his counseP" are called in to argue^^ the busi- 
ness of Mr. Mountagues Episcopal confirmation." 

The questions were two : 

First quere, Whether the exceptions be legal. 

Secondly, Whether the confirmation be good. The last^^ is the point^* 
now in hand, to" which the House enjoined the counsel to speak. 

1 of. Xis; *2,3,7,8,ii; Ta.ia; *i-3. 

* might. X2,4. 
should. '91,12, 

■ answer the same at the Bar. '^1,12. 
^"content. X1-4; 'i'3,S,6. 

satisfaction. Xs, 9, 11,15. 
" he is willing to submit. Xi. 
w it. *2.3. 

" and justice, added. X15. 
i* Sir Walter Erie. Xi-io,iS; ri-6,8. 

w Alderman Moulson and others spoke in this wise and to this. Vj, at the top of a page in the front 
of the book. The intention evidently was to copy in a separate, 
"like X. 

and that he had so many times given him to recollect himself. '4'2-ii; ri-9,12; *i-3. 

and that he had so many times liberty given him to recollect his memory. '^1,12. 

and that he had some time given him to recollect himself. Tii. 
1' could, 'i'1,12; r3,4,i2. 
" to answer at Bar the next morning. 'J' 1,1 2. 
1' concerning Bishop Mountague, He. *4,s. 
20 and others. X3. 
«» answer. $3. 
n dignity. T5. 
S8 of these, added, ■^i. 
** business. Xi-8,is. 

question. 'J's; ri2. 
>* touching. *!. 

• A comparison of this paragraph with Grosvenor reveals skill in condensation on the part of this 
writer who must have had fuller written materials before him. 



54 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 9 

The counsel propounded^^ a third question, What will" be the fruit or 
effect of it, if in law the confirmation prove^^ void ? To this the coiinsel 
said, it will not extend to make him no bishop upon the point of election, 
but upon the point of confirmation only, which makes him pimishable if 
he execute any thing concerning the bishopric.'' 

Sir Henry Marten saith, the exception^^ making void the confirma- 
tion, doth in law work also upon the election, and will make that void also. 3° 

Dr. Steward saith, the point of setting to of the advocates hand is 
but a matter of form in the Court, and no matter of law. 

Sir Henry Marten. I will endeavour to give the House satisfaction, 
the best that I am able, and will speak without relation to the Kings right 
and laws of the realm. 

Since 25° H. 8, except in Queen Marys time, there hath been a 
form concerning the confirming of bishops which is not agreeable to the 
exact rules of the canon law. For Boniface election C. ult" saith, the citation 
must be set up not at Bow, but at the church whereof the Bishop is chosen; 
and if it be not set up there the election is void. By the Statute of 25° 
Hen. 8 having declared that when a bishopric falls void, the King shall 
send his Letters Missive to the dean and chapter; if within twelve days 
they do not choose, the King may choose whom he will, and then there is 
no talking of election or confirmation, but if they do choose, their election 
shall stand good to all intents and purposes, and the person so elected 
shall be taken by the name of the Lord elect (and if so what need of con- 
firmation?). But the Statute addeth that the Archbishop must within 
twenty days confirm him. 

By 1° E. 6, Cap. 2° these formalities being not liked of, and thought 
to savour of the canon, are taken off; and in time of Queen Elizabeth 
they did not renew that of King Edward, repealed by Queen Mary, but 
that of 25° H. 8. And according to that it may be objected, why do they 
make a proclamation to no purpose? To this I say it is not unusual in 
great actions to retain the remembrance of antiquity, notwithstanding of 
alterations since made. It is a rule in the civil law; a reason cannot be 
given of all things. If a man call into question the inauguration of the 
emperor or of the king, the manner of Common Recovery with single or 
double voucher, I would pray him to tell me whether we should exact a 
reality answerable to the formalities in them. And for want of a counsel- 

» proposed. Xg.ii.is: sf'; rs-7; *i-3. 
V would. ■*!. 

shall. *8. 
ii should prove. *i. 
2' execution. ^^4. 
»« and likewise made that void. *i. 

b This is Dr. Stewart's argument. Grosvenor (p. 182). 

« Boniface on elections, last chapter. Cf. Grosvenor (p. 183). 



February 10 TRUE RELATION 55 

lors hand the Lord Keeper may refuse a bill ; so here, for want of formality 
in the taking of these exceptions, they may be void. In case of forbidding 
marriage, not he that will must be heard, but he that will put in security 
to pay expenses. So here nullities go no further than the law doth affix 
them. Ex solemnibus nihil facile innitandum est.^^ 

TUESDAY THE 10th OF FEBRUARY 

A bill was preferred for ordering the government^ of the Summer Islands. 

Another bill was likewise preferred to restrain some abuses in minis- 
ters and magistrates. 

Mr. Rolles complaineth^ that since his' last complaint of the breach 
of the liberties of this House, his warehouse hath been locked up by one 
Massey^ a pursuivant; and that yesterday he was called forth from the 
Committee in the Exchequer Chamber, and served with a subpoena to 
appear in the Star Chamber; but that since he received a letter from Mr. 
Attorney that it was a mistake. The subpoena was read, but the letter 
was not suffered to be read. 

Sir Robert Phelips. You see^ we are made the subjects of scorn 
and contempt. I conceive this to be a bone thrown in by them that seek 
to draw^ a cloud over our sim, our Religion, to divert or interrupt us in 
the prosecution of them.^ I desire* the messenger may be sent for, and 
examined by what^ procurement this subpoena was taken forth; for if we find 
not out those that throw^° these scorns upon us,^^ it is in vain to sit here.* 

Sir Humphrey May. This proceeds from some great error, for I 
will assure you this never proceeded from the King nor Council. I 

" Sir Henry Marten saith, that he will endeavour to give the House full satisfaction, and he will speak 
without relation to the Kings right and according to the laws of the Realm. The proclamation by the common 
law should not be at Bow Church, but at the cathedral church of that diocese where the bishop is to be elected; 
and the dean and chapter and clergy of the diocese are to except, and not every one that will. The arguments 
are endless, and to alter a course so long settled is not good; I conceive it is plain that the King and the law have 
power to deprive him of his bishopric if he deserves the same; I think therefore it were good to decline this dis- 
pute for the present, and to proceed to remove him, which is allowed of. All but Xi. 

February 10, 

^ and plantation, added. X2,4; *3.9,ii. 

» informed the House. X2,4,6, 

*the. Xi,4,ii; *I-S,7; *2. 

* Massen. $3. 

' my masters, added. *3. 

^ have drawn. Xg.ii.is; *2-ii; T; *i-3. 

^ preservation of it. Xi-8; *!. 
preservation of them. X 1 1 . 

« therefore, added. X3. 

» whose. St'i; Tj. 

10 put. Xi-8. 

» If we suffer such scorns to be thrown upon us. *6,8,9. 

If those that throw these scorns upon us may go unpunished. *2,4,s; *i (except unquestioned). 

» In this account the speeches of Phelips and Eliot seem to have been combined into one. Cf. Gros- 
venor, p. 186. 



56 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 10 

therefore desire it may be searched to the bottom, for be confident^^ that 
neither King nor CounciP^ have cast^* in this as a bone. 

Mr. Selden. This is not to be reckoned^^ as an error; for question- 
less it is purposely to affront us, and our own lenities^^ is the cause of it. 

It was ordered that Shemington,'' the messenger that served the sub- 
poena, should be presently sent for to the House.^^ 

A committee of six are appointed to see the information in the Star 
Chamber, and to examine the same, and by whom the same was put in;^' 
and they^' have power to send for persons, or records that may inform 
them; and also they shall have power to enjoin any whom they shall think 
fit to attend this House. 

A general order was agreed upon, that all committees that have power to 
send for parties, shall have power to command any of them, as many as they 
shall think fit, to attend the House at such times as they shall think meet. 

The^" privilege of the merchants that are plaintiffs here may be^^ 
taken into consideration by this Committee, concerning the information 
in the Star Chamber. •= 

Sheriff Acton called to the Bar as a delinquent, upon his knees, saith, if he 
hath offended or erred, it is through want of memory and^^ ignorance, for he 
intended not the least dislike, or distaste to any member of this House. 

Mr. Long moved that he may be sent to the Tower. 

Sir Francis Seymour. That he may now be referred back to the 
Committee to be re-examined; if then^^ he deal not clearly,^^ this House 
may proceed to further punishment. 

Mr. Selden. I cannot remember when we^^ did commit a sheriff of 
London, but I can remember when this House did commit both the sheriff s^' 

"6e it considered, ^i. 

^* State. Xi-4,6-io.is; ^2-11; T; 'l'2,3. 

" thrown. X5. 

" conceived. r2-4. 

"Uberiies. *i. 

limits. '*2-ii, 
" sent for to be examined in the same and by whom it was put in. 'i'S. 
19 execution, added. Xii. 

i' Instead oi A Committee of six .... And that Committee shall. *s. 
»o It is further ordered that the. Xi I. 
« was appointed to be, X2-5. 

is to be. -^4. 
5! or by reason of his. Xi. 
» there. Xii.iS. 
** plainly. Xii. 
fairly, 'i'8,9. 
M this House. Ts.y. 

» a member of this House, a sheriff. Xi. 
*> Shrimpton. See Grosvenor p. 187 and Nicholas p. 136. C.J. 1:928. 

« This is a special application of the 6th point in CJ. 1:928. 



February 11 TRUE RELATION 57 

of London to the Tower for an abuse^^ of less nature, only for coiintenan- 
cing a Serjeant in an arrest on a member of Parliament,^^ though they did 
acknowledge their faults at the Bar, which this man hath not yet done. 
The Serjeant was sent to Little-ease, the party at whose suit he was arrested 
was committed to the Fleet, and both the sheriffs to the Tower. 

Mr. Kirton. I came into this House with as good a heart^^ to this 
man, as any man;^° for I was spoken to^^ to stand for him as I came in, 
and I promised to do him whatsoever favour I could; but if he were my 
brother he should go to the Tower. 

Mr. Littleton. You see the affronts by books, by preaching, by 
rumours, by being daily served with processes that are put upon us, that 
we are become but a mere scarecrow; the neglect of our duty is the cause 
of this. It is high time to remedy this, or it is in vain to sit here. 

The sheriff is again called into the Bar on his knees, and is sentenced 
to the Tower. 

Sir Benjamin Rudyerd. There be divers recantations,^^ submissions, 
and sentences remaining on record in both the Universities against Armini- 
anism, that above any thing may conduce to our end in that business. I 
desire that the Speakers letter may be sent to the Vice-Chancellor for 
those records,^^ which is ordered. 

It was ordered that Wolstenholme, Dawes, and Carmarthen, being 
farmers to the customs, should be sent for, and are to be at the Bar upon 
Friday next. 

WEDNESDAY THE 11th OF FEBRUARY 

Mr. Selden reported concerning the process of the merchants,^ that 
Mr. Attorney gave order for the process, and that his man took forth the 
same. For the Bill it is a course by way of crime for those things which 
depend in Parliament complained of here by the merchants. 

The copy of the Bill is brought in and read, that^ the merchants did 
plot, practice, and combine together against the peace of the Kingdom. 

*^ offence. Xp.ii. 

*» this House. Xi-io,is; *6; Tj. 

**will. X4; ri.io.ii. 

*'> one. X9,ii. 

a very good desire to speak for this man. X6. 
»> intreated. Xg. 
w relations. T4. 
'» to be sent hither, added. *3. 

February 11. 

> Mr. Seldens report concerning the process against the merchants out of the Star Chamber. *4- 
Mr. Selden. Concerning the process of the merchants I am to render an account. It is apparent. Xii 
/ have according to your order inquired after it, and it is manifest, added. XiS- 

* the substance of it was that. Xii. 



58 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 11 

This being conceived to be a business incident to Tonnage and Poundage, 
it is ordered to be deferred until to-morrow morning. 

Mr. Selden moved that a report should be made to-morrow^ of the 
examination of the complaints of the merchants, and that the information 
in the Exchequer Chamber may also be brought; which was also ordered. 

It was ordered that in respect^ the term ends to-morrow, and the 
assizes suddenly^ following, and divers members of the House being lawyers 
may be^ gone, that none shall go forth^ of the Town without leave of the 
House. 

It was also ordered that the Speakers letter shall be sent for Sir Edward 
Coke.« 

At the Committee J or Religion 

Mr. Waller delivered a Petition of the booksellers and printers in 
complaint of the restraint of books written against Popery and Arminianism, 
and the contrary allowed of by the only means of the Bishop of London; 
and that divers of them have been pursuivanted for printing of orthodox 
books; and that the licensing of books is now only restrained to the Bishop 
of London and his chaplains. 

One of the printers said he tendered divers books to have them licensed, 
one called The Golden Spur to the Celestial Race; and that Turner, one of 
the Bishop of Londons chaplains, said,^ that if he would put out the point, 
that a man may be certain of his salvation, he would license the same;^** 
notwithstanding he put out that point, yet" he could not get it^^ li- 
censed. 

Mr. Selden. The refusing the licensing of books is no crime, but 
the licensing of bad books is a crime, or the refusing to license books because 
they write against Popery or Arminianism is a crime. There is no law to 
prevent the printing of any book in England, only a decree in the Star 
Chamber. Therefore that a man should be fined^^ and imprisoned, and 

• morning, added. Xi,3. 

• regard. X3,6. 

' immediately. Xi. 

• would desire to he, Xi. 
' out. *8.9. 

forth out. ^s. 

• to desire his presence at a Committee for Religion, added. X15. 

• unto him, added. X3. 
i<>book. X1-8.IS, 

" which when he had yielded to do, and did put it out. Xii. 
^ his book. Xii. 

the book. X2-8,is: Ts. 

the same. Xg.io; *; rs-8,ii; *. 
"i«ed. *i. 



February 11 TRUE RELATION 59 

his goods^^ taken from him, is a great invasion on the liberty of the subject. 
Therefore he moved^^ that a law may be made on this. 

This is referred to a select committee to be examined. 

Mr. Sherland* reported concerning the pardons, that they have 
examined Dr. Sibthorpes and Cosins pardons; Sibthorpe^^ sollicited his 
own pardon, and said he would get^^ the Bishop of Winchester to get^^ 
the Kings hand to it. It is evident that the Bishop of Winchester got the 
Kings hand to Sibthorpes and Cosins pardons, and^^ also Mountagues 
pardon was promised by him. That Dr. Manwaring sollicited his own 
pardon, and the Bishop of Winchester got the Kings hand to it. It is 
likewise said that the pardons were all drawn b}'- Mr. Attorney before 
there was^" any warrant .'^^ 

Mr. Cromwell said that he had by relation^^ from one Dr. Beard, 
that Beard said, that Dr. Alablaster had preached flat Popery^* at Pauls 
Cross. And that the Bishop of Winchester commanded him, as he was 
his diocesian, that he should preach nothing to the contrary. 

Sir Robert Phelips said that one Dr. Marshall will relate^"* as much 
said to him by the Bishop of Winchester as the Bishop said to Dr. Moore.^* 

Mr. Kirton. That^e Dr. Marshall and Dr. Beard" may^s be sent for. 
For^® this Bishop, though he hath leaped through many bishoprics, yet he 

" books. T2-4. 
t^ I desire. Xi,3. 

/ could wish. Xii. 
" and find that Sibthorpe. *3. 
1' give it /o. ■*!. 

Procure. X15. 
^* procure. Xi-8; *s; Ty. 
^» as. Xi,2,4-is; ^y.p.ii; r2-4,6-8. 
*• without. *8,9. 

'^ delivered unto him, added. Xii. 
M related to the House that he had heard it reported. X3. 
" in a sermon, added. X3. 
'* declare. X9. 
» Alablaster. X2,3,6,8: 'i'l.io. 

Beard. X4. 

in effect as much as he had to Alablaster. Xis. 
»• Let. X4. 

I desire thai. X2,6. 

Mr. Speaker, I desire that. Xii. 

desireth that. X9. 

desired that. Xi. 

moved that. ^4. 

saith that. Ty. 
2' Alablaster. X2.3. 

Moore. Xi. 
»8 should, r?. 
" That. *3; ri-6,8,9. 
• Sherfield. 



60 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 12 

hath left Popery behind him. That'' Cosinj^" frequenting the printing- 
house, hath caused the Book of Common Prayer to be new printed; and 
hath changed the word minister into the word priest, and hath put out in 
another place the word elect. Thus Cosin and his Lord go hand in hand. 

Sir Miles Fleetwood saith, we are to give Mountague his charge 
and by his books chargeth him with : 

First, schism in error of'^ doctrine, 

Secondly, faction in point of^^ State, 

Thirdly, matter of aggravation. 

Sir Walter Erle. Qui color alhus erat nunc est contrarius albo. 
Dr. White hath sold his orthodox books and bought Jesuitical books. 
And moves that Bishop White may go arm in arm^^ with Moimtague. 

It was ordered" that a select committee should be named to digest^* 
these things that have been already agitated, concerning the innovation of 
our Religion, the cause of the innovation, and the remedy. 

THURSDAY THE 12th OF FEBRUARY 

The Sheriff of London upon his submission at the Bar is released of 
his imprisonment in the Tower. 

Sir John Eliot made the report from the Committee in the exami- 
nation of the complaint of the merchants, and delivered in the orders and 
injunctions of the Exchequer. 

At a great Committee for Tonnage and Poundage, Mr. Sherland in the Chair 

Mr. Waller delivered a petition from Chambers, Fawkes, and Gil- 
bourne,^* in complaint of an information against them in the Star Chamber 
about^ Tonnage and Poundage; and that by restraint of their goods they 
are like to be undone. 

Sir John Eliot. The merchants are not only kept from their goods 
by the customers, but by a pretended justice in a court of justice, the 
Exchequer. I conceive, if the judges of that court had their imderstanding 

«» / have heard that Cosin. X3. 

Concerning Cosin, he. *4. 
»' schism in matter of. X. 

schism and error in, 4>3. 
« print and. *8. 
** hand in hand. *8,9; T2-S. 
** consider of. Xi-8. 

*> The rest of this speech belongs to Waller. See Grosvenor, p. 193; Nicholas p. 139. 
• Upon Rich's motion. See Grosvenor, p. 194. 

February 12. 

' Carmarthen. X3. 
^concerning. Xi-8. 
» This should be Oilman. See Nicholas, p. 141; Grosvenor, p. 196; C.J. 1:929. 



February 12 TRUE RELATION 61 



enlightened of their error by this House, they would reform the same, and 
the merchants thereby suddenly come by their goods.^ 

Mr. Wandesford conceiveth this to be a difHcult way for us to go in. 

Mr. Coryton. Let it be done which way the House shall think fit.* 
But I conceive it is fit^ the merchants should have their goods before we 
can think of^ the Bill. Kings ought not by the law of God thus to oppress 
their subjects. I know we have a good King, and this is the advice of his 
wicked ministers; but there is nothing that can be more dishonourable to 
him. 

Mr. Strode. That it may be voted that the merchants may have 
their goods before we enter^ upon the Bill. 

Sir Humphrey May. I shall speak my opinion, because I know not 
whether I shall have liberty to speak, or you to hear any more. All the 
proceedings of the King and his Ministers was to keep the question safe, 
until this House should meet, and you shall find the proceedings of the 
Exchequer were legal; and thus much have I said, not knowing* whether 
I shall attain^ liberty to speak here again.^" 

Sir Thomas Edmondes. There is none here but would think it a hard 
thing, that a possession should be taken from us^^ without any order for 
sequestration; that therefore it was not to be suffered, that those few men 
should so unjustly disturb the government of the State. And desired that 
there might be no interruption, but we may proceed to settle the Tonnage. 

Mr. Coryton. I hope we shall^^ speak here as we may speak in 
Heaven, and do our duties; and let no fear divert us. 

Mr. Waller. It is not^^ so few as five hundred merchants are^* 
threatened in this. 

' He moved that a message might be sent to the Exchequer, added. *4. 

* meet. X2,4. 

may think most convenient, X3. 
5 meet, ^2. 
' can proceed to. Xi. 

enter upon. O2. 
» the House enter. X4. 

the House should enter. Xr,2,s. 

this House should enter. X3. 
8 because I know not. X3. 

• obtain, 'i'8,9. 

have. Xi-8,10; ^lo; r2-4,7. 

have a days. *i-3. 
1" any more here again. *i. 

any more. Xi. 

or no, added. *2. 
ii/Mm. X3.1S; *S.6; ry. 
"may. X; *i,7; r2-4; *i. 
^' is no loss now. Fii. 
" have. "J'7. 



62 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 12 

Sir Robert Phelips. I think it were fitting that some of the House 
may go to the King and move him with these interruptions.^^ 

Mr. Noy. We cannot safely give unless we be^^ in possession, and 
the proceedings in the Exchequer nullified, and the information in the 
Star Chamber, and the annexation to the Petition of Right, and other 
records. I will not give my voice to this untiP' these things be made void; 
for it will not be a gift^^ but a forced confirmation i^^ neither will I give it 
unless^" these interruptions be declared,^^ and a declaration in the Bill, 
that the King hath no right but by our free gift. If it will not be 
accepted, as it is fit for us to give it, we cannot help it. If it be the Kings 
already, as by these new records it seemeth to be,^^ we need not give it. 

Mr. Selden secondeth the motion of sending a message^^ to the 
Exchequer; declareth a precedent of a message sent into the Chancery^* 
for stay of proceedings in a cause,^^ and it was obtained.^^ And what 
answer soever the judges rettun, it cannot prejudice us; the law speaks 
by record, and if these records remain, it will to posterity explain^^ 
the law. 

Mr. Littleton. For the point of right there is no lawyer so ignorant 
of the law as to conceive it, nor any judge of the land to affirm it, it is 
against giving to the King, or going on with the Bill. In this case, by the 
law, a man cannot be put to a petition of right, but shall recover without 
petition.28 

It was ordered that a message should be sent to the Court of the 
Exchequer, That whereas certain goods of the merchants have been stayed 
by injunction from that Court by^^ a false affidavit, and that, upon exami- 

"like Xi-8. 
Moveth we may go to the King and satisfy [certify. X9-11, 13,15-] him of these interruptions. 
X9-II,I3.IS; *; T; *. 

and the obstacles that hinder our proceedings, added. ^3. 

i» were. X1-4. 

>' unless. Ti. 

^ifree gift. X3. 

"^^ for it will he against the confirmation. *2. 

so until. *8.9. 

a cleared. Xi-8. 

removed. *i. 

unless it may be thus declared. Xii. 
'2 appeareth. r2-4. 
28 letter. X3. 

" / think fit a message be sent to the Exchequer, for we may as well send thither as this House did here- 
tofore unto the Chancery. Xii. 
M proceedings there. *6. 
^'obeyed. Xi, 2,4-8, 10-15; *i. 

granted. X3. 
" declare, •'if&.g. 
2' right. *i. 
^i procured by. Xii.is. 



February 13 TRUE RELATION 63 



nation,^'' the customers that made the affidavit have confessed that the 'I 

goods were stayed only for duties contained in the book of rates; that i 

therefore that Court would make void the orders and affidavits in this j 

business. j j 

FRIDAY THE 13th OF FEBRUARY 

A petition was preferred against one Burgess, a priest,^ who was here 
complained of the last Session, containing some new articles^ against him, 
viz., that he reported' that he coiild not* get a copy of his articles^ out of 
the House until he was fain to get one to coimterfeit himself a Puritan 
to get the same, and other new misdemeanours.^ 

It was ordered that he should be sent for.^ 

Sir John Eliot made a motion concerning the privilege of the 
merchants. 

It was ordered that any man having a complaint depending here, 
shall be privileged in his person,^ not freed from suits. 

A committee was also appointed to consider what privilege is to be 
allowed any man that hath any cause depending here.^ In the mean 
time^° intimation shall be given to the Lord Keeper that no attachment 
shall go forth^^ against the merchants. 

Sir Humphrey May reported concerning the message to the Exchequer 
Court, That the Treasvirer, the Chancellor, and the Barons will forthwith 
take the same into consideration and return an answer. 

It was ordered that Mr. Secretary Coke should take care that inti- 
mation be given to the cities of London and Westminster about the Fast. 

Dr. Moore, concerning the Bishop of Winchester, called in,^^ saith, 
that he was referred to the Bishop of Winchester to be censured for a 

«« of this House, added. *i . 

February 13. 
» minister. X. 
^ some new articles. 'J'v; Fy; *3. 

some new articles complained. *i,2. 

some new articles were now preferred. ^5. 

there are some new articles. T2-4. 
*for saying. ^5,6. 

* (as he gave forth in speeches), added. T?. 
' the articles against him. Xi-8. 

the articles preferred against him. Xg.io. 

• against him, added. '^6. 
' into the House, added. ^S- 

* freed in his person with privilege of protection. X3. 

• allowed a member of the House. Xp.ii.is. 
»« It was ordered that. X6. 
"out. Xi-8; r6.ii. 
»2 called to the Bar. *2. 



64 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 13 

sermon preached^^ by him. The Bishop said^^ he had heard him preach 
and deHver many pretty passages against the Papists, which pleased 
King James well/^ but he must not do so now. That you have a brother 
that preacheth against bowing^^ at the name^^ of Jesus, and of bowing to 
the high altar, which he did not like; and the Bishop further said that the 
Communion tables stand as tables in ale-houses, but he would have them 
to be set as high altars. 

Dr. Moore is to^^ deliver these things in^^ writing to-morrow 
morning. 

At the Committee for Religion Mr. Pym in the Chair 

Sir William Bulstrode.^" If we now speak not we may forever hold 
our peace; when, besides the Queens Mass, there are two other Masses 
daily in the Queens Court, so that it is grown ordinary^^ with the out- 
facing Jesuits, and common in discourse. Will you go to Mass, or have 
you been at Mass at Somerset -house ? there coming five hundred at a 
time from Mass. He desires fiirther that it may be known^^ by what 
authority^* the Jesuits that were lately^* in Newgate were released. 

Mr. Coryton. I doubt not but his Majesties^* intention was good 
in the declaration lately published; but I conceive^^ it will be made use 
of only to our disadvantage. He desireth^^ therefore the declaration may 
be taken into serious consideration. 

»' at Pauls Cross, added. Tii. 

1* told him. Ft. 

>' in a sermon he preached before King James. Xr-8. 

i^ of knee, added. •*8,9; *2. 

1' holy name. Ti. 

>' is ordered to. ^5. 

It was ordered that Dr. Moore should. X3,is. 
1' put this discourse into. Xis. 
»o like *. 

Sir Robert Phelips. Xr-io; ^i. 

Sir Walter Erie. X11.15. 

Sir John Eliot. Ts-y. 

Mr. Waller. *i2. 

No name given in the others, 
"comwiow. "f 1,3,5' 

^^that the House would be pleased to give order that it might be examined. Xi. 
ii warrant. *!. 
2* lately committed. T2. 
'i the Kings. Xp, 11,15. 
^* perceive. r6,ii, 

(said he), added. X9. 
2» moved. Xi,2,4. 



February 13 TRUE RELATION 65 

Sir Richard Grosvenor reports^* the proceedings of this House 
against Popery the last Session and what fruit hath been therein.^^ 

Mr. Pym. In this great business^" concerning ReHgion, and the stay- 
ing of the execution of the laws against Recusants, it will much conduce 
to our purpose and fiurther^^ our resolutions, to cast back oiur eyes to what 
was done the last Session. You may remember, Sir, that amongst many 
other businesses of weight, ^^ ^yg ^^en took to heart^^ the decay of Religion; 
we sought after the preservation of it, and how to maintain it in its own 
purity. We found that of late years it had been much wounded by hearten- 
ing^^ of Papists, and by conferring offices upon Recusants. We summoned 
our judgments, and employed our best cares and pains for stopping the 
current of Popery, which by such means, like a deluge, came flowing in 
upon us. And well did it befit the piety^^ of this House to be so zealous 
for the preservation^^ of that, which ought to be so precious to every good 
mans soul, and so dear in their eyes. And this we attempted by these 
and the like steps.^^ 

First, By that religious Petition, wherein it pleased the Lords so 
readily to join with us. 

Secondly, By framing a bill against Recusants, which passed both 
Houses, whereby his Majesty had been much enriched, and better enabled 
to compass his due from them, and to avoid their deceits in defrauding 
him thereof. 

Thirdly, By informing him of the^* numbers and particiilars, and by 
petitioning him to remove all Papists and Popishly affected from the 
Court, from places of trust, and from places of power. 

Fourthly, By examining the dangers and inconveniences of those 

"repeats. *7-9,ii; r8. 

repeateth. X9; *3; r3,4. 

repents, ri.io. 
'• have followed thereof since. *i. 

Sir Richard Grosvenor. Report the 13th of February 1628. Xio,i3; ^n; T2. 

Sir Richard Grosvenor concerning Religion. *4.S. 

Sir Richard Grosvenor touching Religion. ■*6,io. 

Sir Richard Grosvenors report. ^2. « 

»<> question. Til. 
i^forward. Xis; *i; Ti. 
82 many things of weight and consequence. X3. 
^^ into consideration. Xi. 
»*favoring. Xi. 
^profit, ri.ii. 

purity. Tt. 
•e like Xi-3,S. 

prosperity. Xii.is; *i; Fa, 7, 11. 
>^ stops, ri.ii. 
38 their. X3. 



66 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 13 

late commissions and instructions granted forth, for the compounding 
with Recusants for their estates and forfeitures.^^ 

Fifthly, By framing a charge to usher^" up Mr. Mountague to the 
Lords; not to his seat amongst the reverend society of Bishops, but to the 
Bar, as an offender against that House, this, and the whole Church of God. 

But now, what good hath this our zeal brought to Religion, what 
profit to the Church ? We all know (and with thankfulness acknowledge) 
that his Majesty gave a most pious and gracious answer to our Petition 
of Religion, and to some particulars, as fully as we could desire; which 
raised our hopes to the expectation of much*^ good, and some hath followed. 
For it is true (Mr. Pym)^^ -tj^at the promised Proclamation to command 
the Judges, and other Ministers of Justice, to put the laws in execution 
against Recusants, their Priests and Jesuits, is now extant; which yet 
seems to me to have been so*^ long kept back by some back friends to 
Religion. And I am induced to think thus for these reasons, viz., 

My first reason I draw from common fame, it being generally^* re- 
ported that, instead of life and motion to the laws in force against*^ 
Recusants, the judges had in charge before the last Circuit^^ to deal spar- 
ingly with them. 

My second reason I draw from the time when this Proclamation came 
forth, which was five weeks after the ending of the Session,^^ when some 
of the Circuits were ended, or so near a conclusion that the judges could 
take little or no notice thereof. 

Thirdly, from consideration of a former Proclamation, dated the 7th 
of July, which though it passed not the Seal, yet it did the press; and in 
my poor opinion, would never have gone so far (knowing the resolution 
of Council to be more certain) had not some men hoped to have prevented 
the latter by procuring the former as a satisfaction, which falls far*^ short 
of his Majesties pious intentions expressed in that his religious Answer. 
And if, with reverence, I may speak my htmible thoughts, they do both of 
them, in the conclusion, too much encourage the worst of subjects to hope 

"states and fortunes. Xi ^ 

" offer. Xs. 

1 some. Xs. 

«2 (Mr. Speaker). Ti. 

**loo. Xii.is. 

** credibly. X1-3. 

• motion of laws against. X 1-3,5. 

«• Session. Xi-3,5. 

"like X2.3; rn. 

after the end of the Session, 'i'l. 

after the ending of the Sessions. Xir; ri,2. 

before the ending of the last Session. Xi. 
«8 much. X1-3. 



February 13 * TRUE RELATION 67 

for his Majesties best favour, too fairly inviting^^ them to compound for 
their f orf eitiires ; which course this House was bold to style little less^° 
than a toleration. Again, is the concotirse^^ of Recusants as yet restrained 
from the Court? Nay,^^ do they not since our recess frequent it with 
more confidence and greater alacrity? Do not their hopes daily increase, 
and themselves grow more insolent, their fear ended with the Session? 
Is the promised watch yet^^ appointed to keep them from Ambassadors 
Houses? Had the judges in charge to inform themselves in their last 
Circuits, and after their return to certify his Majesty^* of all such Papists 
and Popishly affected as they should find to be in authority 1^^ I have not 
yet heard it, and to me these are all the known effects of that Religious 
Petition. Next^" take we notice of the abortion of that necessary bill 
against Recusants, which when we hoped wotild have received life and 
perfection by the Royal assent, perished in embryo, suddenly vanished, as 
being too cruel, too unmerciful. Consider^^ what fruit we have reaped from 
that Petition and Information, whereby we let his Majesty know the par- 
ticulars of such Papists and Popishly affected, as were in each County in 
Commission of the Peace, Lieutenancy, etc. Are any of them since re- 
moved ? Nay, it is well if their number be not increased. 

Oh, Mr. Pym, this breaks the heart; if God be God, let us follow him, 
and if Baal be God, let us follow him, and no longer halt between two 
opinions. For whilst we are thus careless in standing for God that we 
dare scarce own cur own Religion, it is no marvel that God estrangeth 
himself from us, and will not own us, as by too woeful experience we have 
cause to suspect. Since we find he goeth not forth with our armies, since 
so ill success attends all our actions, we may justly suspect we have not 
made our peace with him. / 

And, Mr. Pym, to these griefs and discouragements, I find an addition 
of that nature, that threatens the very ruin and desolation^^ if not 

*' loo fairly invite. Vi. 

to fairly invite. Xi 1,15. 

fairly to invite. Ty. 
'0 better. Xi,3,is. 
^^ course. Xl,3,is; Tl. 

recourse. Xii; Fy. 
'= Nay it is well, if their numbers be not increased. X3. 
" Fourthly. Is the promised watch as yet. ^i. 
M give account to his Majesty. Tj. 

his Majesty to have notice. Xii. 
" as were in their Circuits in any authority. X3. 
*« Fifthly. Next. <ki. 
s'like ri.ii. 

And thereby consider we. Xi-3,s. 

Sixthly, and lastly, considering. . *i. 

And thirdly consider we. T2. 

And thirdly consider. Xii.iS- 
" 0/ MJ, added, 'i'l. 



68 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 13 

dissolution of Religion in this land, if God himself take not his own cause 
into his own hand; and that is the countenancing and preferring of a 
plotting, undermining, and dangerous sect of upstart divines, when Armini- 
ans shall be graced and preferred before honester^^men, when such desperate 
divines, as have fired a part of Christendom, almost ruined our neighbours, 
kindled their firebrands, and cast their dangerous sparks abroad in our 
Church, shall be encouraged to go on in planting their damnable doctrines 
and propositions,^" which already have taken too fast rooting, too deep 
footing in our Universities, and many other parts of this land.^^ 

You may remember, Sir, what care and pains this House took (as a 
matter of great consequence) to frame a charge against Mr. Mountague, 
which was ready with the first opportunity to have transmitted him to 
the Lords; but these many interruptions we have had, have given^^ back- 
ing^3 to that, as to many other businesses of weight; yet was this man 
presently^* after the ending of the last Session dignified with the sacred 
title of Bishop of that See, wherein his predecessor (a grave^^ and orthodox 
prelate) had laboured both by his pen and doctrine^^ to strangle those 
errors, and to confute Mr. Mountague; as if the ready way" to obtain a 
bishopric now, were to undermine Religion, and to set the Church in 
combustion. 

Another also of his own profession, a little better than himself, I mean 
time-pleasing Manwaring, hath also tasted extraordinary favour. This 
man attempted to make his holy function a means to seduce the Kings 
conscience, to misguide his judgment, to disjoint his affection from his 
people, to avert^* his mind from calling of Parliaments; the particulars of 
his damned doctrine are yet fresh in our^^ memories. What could a man 
have done worse ? For hereby he did as much as in him lay violently^" to 
break in pieces that cord, and to wrest in sunder^^ that chain, which links 
and ties and unites the hearts and affections of the Prince and people 

i* other. Xi-3,5. 

'"positions. Xi,2,ii,is; Ti. 

•« kingdom. Xi-3,5. 

•' we met withall, gave. X3. 

>> breaking, ri.ii. 

"* shortly. X15; *i; Ti. 

66 grave devine. Ti. 

great and prayerful. X15. 
^directions. Ti. 
" as if the very ready way. 'J'l. 

whose ready way. ri,7,ii. 
«« divert. X3,S. 
'^your. X1-3; ri. 
" violently strive. T2. 

seek violently. T7. 
''i pieces. Xii. 



February 13 TRUE RELATION 69 

together. Verily they,'^ ^j^^t sh'all thus go about to seduce or corrupt a 
Prince, deserve^^ to be hated of all men,^^ as much as those that attempt 
to poison a public spring or fountain whereof all drink; for which offence 
of his, he received just but^^ moderate censure; one partictdar whereof 
was, that he should be forever disabled from holding any ecclesiastical 
dignity in the Church. And although it be confessed that the Doctor 
justly brought upon himself the censiu-e of Parliament , yet was this man,'^ 
immediately after our rising, released from his imprisonment, reported to 
have the honour to kiss^^ the Kings hand, obtained his^^ pardon in folio, 
preferred to a rich living, and (if fame^^ say true) cherished^" assured hopes 
of future dignity in the Church. If these be the steps to Church prefer- 
ment, God be mercifiil to those Churches which shall fall under the govern- 
ment and feeding of such a clergy. 

Thus, Mr. Pym, you see the issue of our good endeavours vanish into 
smoke; what should be the reason, I know not; but I may well guess that 
it comes by the like practices that were used in King James his time, for 
then had we the like gracious answers to Petitions of Religion, the like 
Proclamations, the like Declarations, the like commands to put laws in 
execution ^^ against Recusants, and yet little done, being prevented by 
secret direction and command of some eminent Ministers of State, which 
I am able to justify^^ by a letter under their hands, which I have now 
about me. And I wish that all such as have notice^^ of any such private 
letters as have been sent for stay of execution of these laws, would give 
this House notice thereof. ^^ 

Sir Robert Phelips. If ever there were a necessity^^ of*^ dealing 
plainly and freely, this^^ is the time; there is an admission of Papists and 

"Ae. ri.ii. 

''^deserves. T 1,2,11. 

''* good men, X1-3. 

« yet. Xi-3.5. 

'« a/so, added. Xis; '*'!. 

" the favour to have kissed. Xs. 

'»o. Xi-3,s,iS. 

'"some. X15; *i. 

^i" with, added. ri,7,ii. 

81 concerning laws to be put in execution. X2. 

for the operation of laws. X3. 
i^ certify. Xi-3,s. 
8* knowledge. X2. 
M notice of it. Xs. 

knowledge thereof . ri,2,7,ii. 
M time. Xi-8. 
^for. Xi,3. 

in. 'i'y; $2. 
"now. X9,iS; *i.3.5-9.il. 



70 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 13 

Jesuits, as if it were in Spain or^^ France. This increase of Papists*^ is 
by connivance of persons that be in authority ; there are nine hundred and 
forty persons in houses of Religion, being English, Scotch, and Irish, in 
the Netherlands, maintained by the Papists of England. And of this I 
shall deliver the particulars, that we may frame a remonstrance to the 
King;^° and truly inform him, that unless there be some better perform- 
ance of his Majesties so many answers to our petitions, our Religion will 
be past recovery. 

Mr. Coryton moved that those^^ Papists^^ by laws or acts of State^^ 
may be removed from their offices and commands, whom we have just 
cause to suspect.^* 

Mr. Selden moveth that these things may be debated in order; and 
first for releasing the Jesuits that were arraigned at Newgate, ^^ whereof 
one was condemned. They were ten in number^® which were priests, who 
had a college here in London about Clerkenwell; and those men neither 
could nor diurst attempt these acts but that they have great countenancers. 

Secretary Coke. It is plain there was a place appointed for this 
college in Clerkenwell, and orders and relics prepared for the same, and 
that a Minister of State (which is said to be himself) having notice of 
these ten men, and this college, intended to be kept at^^ Clerkenwell, 
made the King acquainted with it, and I should not do my duty, if I should 
not declare how much his Majesty was affected with^^ it. His Majesty 
referred it to the special care of the Lords of the^^ Council j^"" who examined 

'>o«d. *i,5-ii. 
«9 Priests. Xi. 

their number. X9. 
»o his Majesty. Xi-8. 
«io//. Xi-10,15. 
•2 which are in office, added. *4. 

priests and Papists. Xii. 
*^ laws or acts of Statute. r2; *2. 

laws or acts of Parliament. X4. 

acts of Parliament or laws of State. *i. 
•« if any cause appear to suspect them. X3. 

and therefore no reason to trust them, added. X9,io,i3. 
*^ moved that the brisiness might be examined concerning the release of the Jesuits lately in Newgate. 
Xl,2,4,5. 

/ desire it may be examined how those Jesuits that were lately in Newgate were released. X3. 

and first that the business might be examined for the releasing of the Jesuits^ that were arraigned at New- 
gate. X9.I0,I3- 

»8 in all, added. X3. 
" appointed in. Xi-8. 
88 offended with. X; *6.7. 

offended at. *4. 

disliked, ri-4,6-12. 

misliked. T5. 
'»his. Xis; r2,4. 
^00 Privy Council. Xi. 



February 13 TRUE RELATION 71 

the same, and gave order to Mr. Attorney to prosecute the law against 
them. That^°^ this college was first at^"^ Edmonton, removed from thence 
to Camberwell, and from thence to Clerkenwell.^"^ 

It was ordered that all the knights and burgesses of the House shall 
to-morrow morning declare their knowledge, what letters or other hin- 
drances have been^"^ for the stay of proceedings against Recusants. ^"^ 

Mr. Long,i°^ a Justice of the Peace,^"^ who is said to understand much 
in this business of the College of Jesuits at Clerkenwell, sent for and ex- 
amined, saith, that by the appointment of Mr. Secretary Coke he appre- 
hended these persons, and took their examinations ; and saith further, that 
he heard they^"^ were delivered out of Newgate^"^ by order from Mr. At- 
torney. That Mr. Middlemore,^^° a general solicitor for the Papists,"^ 
hired this house for^^^ ^he Lord"^ of Shrewsbury"* a Papist ; and that there 
are divers books of accounts of receipts"^ and disbursements to the value 
of 300"® pounds per annum with divers Recusants names who"^ allowed 
towards the maintenance of this college, and these books and papers are 
in the hands of Mr. Secretary Coke. 

It was moved that Secretary Coke should first declare his knowledge 
in this business. 

Secretary Coke saith, he cannot so amply"® declare the truth"^ of 
the proceedings herein until he have leave from his Majesty. 

One Cross, a pursuivant, belonging to the High Commission Court, 
who first^^o gayg intimation of the persons to the Secretary, being likewise 
examined about this business, and being the special man appointed by 

"» And it appeared that. Xi. 
'•>' erected at. X3. 
"B London. Xi-8. 
"• been procured. X3. 
><* Jesuits and Recusants. $3. 
iM George Long, Esq. Ty. 
»" in Middlesex, added. X9; r?. 
"• these men. X2-S. 
these priests. Xi. 
»«» prison. Fa. 
»» Mildmore. X4. 
"> priests. Ti. 
"So/. Fz. 
"' Earl. X9. 
^^* Salisbury. ri2. 
"' payments. *i. 
^3000. Xis. 

"' which divers Recusants, ^z. 
"' (as he would), added. *4. 
"• {as he desirelh), added. 'i'S. 
120 at the first. Xs. 



72 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 14 

the Justice to search /^i saith, he can discover many and divers stoppages^22 
of the execution of the laws against Recusants. 

Ordered that Sir Thomas Hobby and others should inquire further 
after this business. 

SATURDAY THE 14th OF FEBRUARY 

A complaint was made^ against the Lord Lambert, a Baron of Ireland, 
and a member of this House, who, being a Colonel of soldiers in Middlesex, 
hath imposed four pence upon every soldier towards his officers charges ;2 
and the petitioner, for refusing to pay, was first set in the stocks, and after 
by the Lord Lambert himself committed^ to a public prison. 

It was ordered that the Lord Lambert should be sent for* to answer 
unto this complaint. 

Sir John Ipsley^ desireth leave to answer a complaint against him 
in the Lords^ House.^ 

Mr. Selden. That the use was (and cited divers precedents to that 
purpose) that no Commoner could^ be called to the Lords House, but^ it 
will trench^ much upon^" the disadvantage of the privilege" of this House,*' 
and until ISth^^ of King James there was never a precedent to the contrary. 
And he moved that this therefore may be considered of by a select committee. 

It was ordered that Sir John Ipsley shall not have leave." 

Sir Humphrey May stiffly^^ secondeth the motion of Mr. Selden.*^ 

isi and examine out the said business, added. Xi. 
"J passages of the stoppage. *3. 

February 14. 

> A Petition was preferred. Xi-8. 
» wages. *8,9. 
' sent. X3. 

• being a member of this House, added. X4,7. 
being of the lower House, added. Xi-3,5. 
being himself of the lower House, added. Xg.io. 

i upper. Xi-8. 
higher. ■*!. 

• of Parliament, added. *i. 
^should. X; *3.S-7.9; Tz.S.? 
ifor. Xi-io. 

»tend. r?. 
10 io. r; *i,3. 

on. Xi. 
" liberty. X3,S- 
i^lOth. X1-9; *6. 
i» strongly. X9. 

• on Eliot's motion. Grosvenor, p. 206. 

*> From here on it is Phelips who is speaking. Nicholas, p. 147: Grosvenor, p. 206. 
^ This order was made upon Phelips' motion. Nicholas, p. 147; Grosvenor, p. 206. 
"• It was Phelips' motion. See above note c. 



February 14 TRUE RELATION 73 

Mr. Secretary Coke. I am as careful to maintain a good corre- 
spondency with the Lords, as any man; but connivances in^* this kind may 
overthrow the fundameiital rights and Hberties^^ of this House. Let 
it therefore be seriously considered of, for this matter not only 
concemeth the right of this House, but the liberty of the whole 
Commonwealth . 

It was ordered that a special select committee shall be appointed to 
consider of this. 

Sir Humphrey May delivereth an answer in writing from the Lord 
Treasurer, Chancellor, and Barons of the Exchequer, to the message sent 
to them by the House of Commons, as followeth: 

Whereas the Honourable the House of Commons, by their order of the 
12th of this instant February, have appointed that notice should be given to 
the Lord Treasurer, Chancellor, and Barons of the Exchequer, of a declara- 
tion made by Sir John Wolstenholme, Abraham Dawes,^^ and Richard 
Carmarthen, then in the said House of Commons, of the goods that^^ the 
merchants brought into the Kings store-house, and laid up there for his 
Majesties use, were detained, as they conceived, only for the duty of 
Tonnage and Poundage, and other sums comprised^ ^ in the book of rates; 
which notice was so given, to the end the said Court of Exchequer might 
further proceed therein, as to justice should appertain. Now the Lord 
Treasurer, Chancellor, and Barons, out of their due respect to that 
Honourable House, and for their satisfaction, do signify, that by the 
orders and injunctions of the said Coiurt of Exchequer, they did not deter- 
mine, nor any ways trench^^ upon the right of Tonnage and Poundage, 
and so they did declare openly in Court at the making of the said orders; 
neither did they by the said orders and injunctions bar the owners of the 
said goods to sue for the same in a lawful course. But whereas the said 
owners endeavoured to take those goods out of the Kings actual possession 
by writs or plaints of replevin, which was no lawful action or course in the 
Kings case, 20 nor agreeable to his regaP^ prerogative: Therefore the said 
Court of Exchequer, being the Court for ordering the Kings revenue, did 
by those orders and injunctions stay those suits, and did fully declare by 

"0/. X; r4; *3. 
15 privileges. X2-4. 

i» 5iV Abraham Dawes. *i. / 

" that the goods of. Xi,2. 
1' contained. Xi. 
^* touch. Xi,2,ii.is. 
"^0 cause. *i. 
^ royal. Sfi. 
not agreeing with his legal. Xi,2 



74 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 14 

the said orders, that the owners, if they conceived themselves wronged, 
might take such remedy^^ as the law alloweth.^' 

Signed, 

Rich. Weston, Treasurer. 

Lo. Newburgh, Chancellor. 

John Walter,24 Q^ief Baron. 

John Denham. 

Tho. Trevor. 

George Vernon. 

Mr. Kirton.® We looked for satisfaction, but now we^^ see^^ a justi- 
fication of their actions. I therefore desire we may now proceed to con- 
siders^ of their proceedings,^^ and whether ever the Court of Exchequer held 
this course before, for staying of replevins; and whether this hath been done 
by the regaP^ prerogative of the King, or^" in the Court of Exchequer. 

It was ordered that a select committee^^ of the lawyers and Exchequer 
men, shall take this into their consideration,'^ a^^ search into the prece- 
dents of the Exchequer. 

Mr. Selden. We have delayed^' the'* proceedings with'^ the cus- 
tomers, expecting'^ some good success from the Exchequer; but finding it 
otherwise, I desire the customers may be called to the Bar on Monday 
next. Which was ordered accordingly. 

At the Committee J or Religion 

Sir Thomas Hobby reported from the Committee for the examination 
of the keeper and clerk of Newgate concerning the priests, that he and the 

■i* order. Xi,2. 

^requireth. Xi. 

s« Waller. Fi. 

'iyou. X2,4,9-ii.i5; *i,2,6-ii; Ti, 2,6-9.12; *. 

«find. XI. 

«' inquire. 'J'8,9. 

2' actions. Xi-io. 

"^^ royal. Xis; Ty. 

'Oor omitted in Xis; 'i'3.6; T; 4>i-3. 

51 for the examination of the keeper, added. Ty. 

M shall take this into hand. Ti. 

should consider of it. Xi, 2,4-15. 

should inquire after this. X3. 
M delivered. ^6. 

declared. ■*3.7-io. 
MoMr. X1-3; r?. 
M of. 4-2. 

where. ^8.9. 
M expected. *8,9. 

• From its content it seems probable that this speech was given by Selden. Cf. Grosvenor, p. 207 ; 
Nicholas, p. 147. 



February 14 TRUE RELATION 75 

rest that were appointed for that service did examine the keeper of New- 
gate, that he had received the first^^ of December ten prisoners suspected 
to be priests, ^^ and said that at the Sessions next following^^ three of them 
were indicted for priests, and one of them was condemned, who was after- 
wards reprieved; and the night before the execution, Mr. Recorder sent 
him a warrant to stay execution, which was seconded by a warrant from*" 
the^^ Lord Chief Justice Hyde. All the rest did refuse the oath of allegiance, 
and it was ordered that they should be kept until'*^ the next Sessions. And 
a few days after the Sessions, the Earl of Dorset sent the keeper word, that 
his Majesties pleasiire was that they shotdd be delivered ;^^ after that a 
warrant came from Mr. Attorney to bring the priests before him, who took 
sureties of them to appear within twenty days after notice given at the 
Council-board, and so they were discharged.'*^ 

Sir Nathaniel Rich. I am confident the grace"*^ of the King hath 
been abused^^ in this; that therefore*^ the Privy Councellors of the House 
may^* know whether it was by his Majesties direction. 

It was moved*^ that Secretary Coke may^° first declare his knowledge 
in this.^^ 

Secretary Coke thereupon made a long relation^^ iq ^]^q House con- 
cerning these priests and the discovery of them, and produced the papers 
that were found in the house amongst them upon search made; and he 
said that it did appear^^ that they were Jesuits and priests by the inventory 

" tenth. *4.S. 

>8 Papists. *9. 

3»like Xi-8. 
the 3rd of the same month. Xis. 
the 3rd of December last. *i.8; Petyt S38:i8. 
the 30th of December last. ■^3-7.9,10. 

*" sent from. ^3. 

<i my. Xi.is. 

« unto. Xi-8. 
to. Xg. 

«' out of prison, added. Xi. 

«< From that he and the rest . . . , follows *; X. 
there being a warrant under Mr. Attorneys hand for the delivery of these persons; a warrant under the 
Lord Chief Justice his hand, according to a letter which he received from the Lord of Dorset, signifying that 
it was his Majesties pleasure that the priest condemned should be reprieved; another warrant under Mr. 
Attorneys hand in the Kings name, to release the nine other persons. T; *. 

« good. X9. 

*6 much abused. ■^10. 

" it were fitting therefore. Xi-8. 

*» should. Xi-8. 

*» / desire. Xii. 

^Omust. ri-5,7-i2. 

'1 /* is evident that this college at Clerkenwell was a college of Jesuits holden under a foreign super and 
head, added. Xii. 

^"^declaration. ^1. 

w which did most apparently prove, added. Xi. 



76 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 14 

of their goods. They had their chapel and library replenished, a common 
kitchen, buttery, and cellar; their household stuff was all marked with 
J.S. There was a monthly book of all their daily expenses, and a con- 
tracted annual account in Latin, under the rectors hand. It appeared that 
they had purchased 200^^£ lands per annum, and 60£ in money did remain 
over and above their expenses. There were also divers^^ letters, directions, 
and orders from Popish fathers from Rome, and alP® parts beyond the seas. 
They had an appointed" time of meeting, which was St. Josephs Day, and 
all that day the}^ spent in saying mass.^^ And he said all their papers 
were delivered to Mr. Attorney, who recommended them to Mr. Long.^^ 

Sir Francis Seymour taxed^" both Mr. Attorneys affection and judg- 
ment in this,^^ and also declareth that^^ continuaF^ letters were sent from 
Mr. Attorney in stay of proceedings against Recusants.^* You see in this^* 
how slightly Mr. Attorney hath put over a business of this weight*^ to Mr. 
Long. 

Cross the pursuivant^^ saith there was an eleventh man in the New 
Prison,^* and the keeper of the prison saith, he was®^ delivered by warrant 
from the Council-board. 

M20. Xis; ^a.s-y.Q; Petyt 538:18. 

«5 delivered. *8,9. 

Mother. Xi; ^6. 

»' a, added. *i. 

n and all that day they should say mass. 'J'S.io; Petyt S38:r8. 

and then they should have said mass. 'ti. 

they should say mass. Xis; *3,7. 

they shall say mass. Xg. 

■when they should say mass. *6. 

when they were to say mass. *s. 
" Instead of this report: One Cross gave intimation of the persons to the Secretary. Super totam 
materiam. It is evident that the college at Clerkenwell is a college of Jesuits holden under foreign, supreme 
head. T; *. 

«o with vehemency taxeth. "^i. 
« this business. Xa.p.io. 
« / have heard also of. X3. 
•5 continually. Xs. 
M in this business. Xi. 

against Papists, ^s. 

his letters for stay of execution and proceedings against Recusants are frequently extant. Xis. 
M You see {saith he). ■*!. 

And we may herein observe. X3. 

He concluded with an observation. Xp.io. 
•6 put off this business which was of so great weight and consequence. Xi,3,5. 

put over a business of this weight and consequence. X9. 
•' being examined, added, '^i. 
"like Xii.is; *3-7; *. 

were eleven men in the New Prison. '^1,2,8,10. 

were eleven men in the prison. T. 

were eleven men committed. Xp.io. 

were ten men committed. Xr,3,s. 
>* they were. Xi-io; ^1,2,8-11; T. 



February 14 TRUE RELATION 77 

Sir John Eliot. In all this I see his Majesties goodness is clear, and 
we shall^" still retain the comfort of it. You see here a ground of^^ a new- 
Religion, but a foundation for the underminers^^ Qf g^ij states," and when 
they should be brought to trial, then I see the over-officiousness of ministers 
of state to interpose themselves to preserve these to all our ruin.^ These 
men were in subjection to a foreign power, and disclaimed our Sovereign. 
What could^^ be their purpose that laboured so to find out a way to free 
them, but still to work^^ our ruin? I^^ fear^^ the drawing of the indict- 
ment was maliciously done.^^ The persons that I look at are first the 
Attorney, whom we still find faulty in this matter of Religion, when he^^ 
saw the importance of the cause, and had directions from the King and 
the Council-board, and yet in a cause*" that so much*^ concerns the King 
and people and Religion and all, he must take his own hand away and put 
it to another; this negligence renders him inexcusable. The next is that 
great Lord the Earl of Dorset; I find him to interpose. ^^ Let us fix it on 
his person, and know by^^ what warrant he did what was done. I observe 
another person faulty also; I hear a** priest was condemned, and Mr. 
Recorder made a reprieval. ' No man cotdd vent his malice more to this 
Kingdom*^ than in the preservation of these men.*^ 

Mr. Recorder is ordered to be sent imto, to be examined in this, rather 
than to be sent for,*^ having formerly had the honour to sit in the Chair. « 

"• may. X2-S. 
" is a ground laid for. *r, 

" hut the founders thereof, who are the underminers. Xi-8. 
^i estates. Xi-8,io,ii.is; *5. 
'« should. Xi, 2,4,5. 
would. *6. 

78 /or /. *i. 

"^n<f. Xis. 

^'for that purpose, added. *i. 

" we. *7.8. 

8° case. *8,9. 

81 near. *s. 

K himself herein, added. ■Iri. 

w with. Xi-io,i5. 

M<A«. X2,4,is. 

» No man could have found a way better to vent his malice against King and people. Xi. 

8« No man could find a way to vent his malice more against Church and Stale than by protecting these men; 
that this may be fixed on that great Lord, the Earl of Dorset, who I fear hath too much soiled his fingers in this 
business: And on Mr. Attorney, whom I am sorry I have occasion to nominate so often in this matter of 
Religion, in stopping of proceedings against Recusants. Xi, 5,9,10; T; *. 

8' as a delinquent, added. *!. 
' Nicholas makes this passage clear, p. 149. 
B Eliot had moved that he be sent for, but on Finch's motion that was changed. Grosvenor, p. 211. 



78 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 16 

Secretary Coke saith, that we shall find^^ that the King, being merciful 
in case of ^^ blood, gave direction for the reprieving of the condemned priest. 

Sir John Eliot. I doubt not but when we shall declare the depth of 
this to his Majesty, he will, instead of mercy, render them to judgment^" 
that gave him advice therein. 

Sir Nathaniel Rich. The Jesuits are bounden to answer further 
upon notice at the Council-board. I wish these bonds wotdd produce^^ 
the men, that by the examination of them, we might find out the whole 
pack of their benefactors and countenancers.^^ 

Mr. Long^^ saith, that he offering at the Sessions the evidence against 
them, by order from Mr. Attorney, the Lord Chief Justice Richardson inter- 
rupted him, and told him he must speak to the point in issue, whether priests 
or no priests; and thereupon the judges consulted amongst themselves.^* 

Mr. Selden saith, that he was present at the Sessions, and plain 
treason proved, and nothing done in it. 

The further examination of this is referred to a select Committee. 

MONDAY THE 16th OF FEBRUARY 

Sir Henry Marten made report,* that he with others went to the 
Recorder of London, to know by what warrant he made stay of the execu- 
tion of the priest. He denied that he gave any order or direction for the 
stay. And^ James, the clerk of Newgate,^ came to me and said, that he 
was sorry that he did name Mr. Recorder, for the Recorder gave no direc- 
tion, but the warrant came from the Lord Chief Justice Hyde. We^ went 
to the Lord Chijf Justice Hyde, and he said that his warrant was* from 
his Majesty immediately.^ 

Sir Francis Seymour made report to the House and said, myself and 
others came^ to Mr. Attorneys chamber, and not finding him we went to 

»* desire. Ti. 

" of shedding. *i. 

*^juslice, X3. 

»i procure. XiS; *3.S-7. 

*' benefactors and maintainers. '^i. 

benefactors, maintainers and countenancers. *6. 
»' being called, added. *i. 

a justice of Midlands, added. *7. 
** and so arose, added. "*i. 

February 16. 

1 Whereupon. *i. 

^ being there present, added. *i. ' 

' Whereupon he, the said Sir Henry Marten, with the rest of the Committee. *i. 

*came. Xi-8. 

' who told them that he gave his said warrant by command from his Majesty. *i. 

'went. Xi-io,iS. 

» This report was made at the Grand Committee for Religion. Grosvenor. p. 213. 



February 16 TRUE RELATION 79 

Mr. Long, who showed us a letter from Mr. Attorney directed to himself, 
which was all the instructions he had for prosecuting against three'' priests, 
and not otherwise. And for the other men, to take them into a private 
room, and to offer them the oath of allegiance; which if they refused, then 
to proceed to a praemunire. And after this we went to Mr. Attorney, and 
desired him to give us answer to particular questions,^ and he set down the 
answer with his own hand, but afterwards he seemed^ loth to deliver it to 
us, which at last he did. 

The answer was read in the House, as followeth: 

I did receive order from the Council "^ to proceed against the priests, 
and I did accordingly proceed against them, and I gave directions, ^^ and 
took the examinations and informations, and I sent for Mr. Long, and 
desired him to take special care^^ therein. I know not, nor never heard, 
of any lands conveyed to the college, but only in general, and I gave direc- 
tions to entitle the King to the goods. I understood an indictment was 
preferred against three of them for treason, and the rest of praemunire; 
and I receiving a command from his Majesty for their bailment, I con- 
ceived^^ them to be bailable. 

It was ordered that such as were convicted and condemned, should be 
proceeded against. 

Mr. Selden reported that he and some others^^ examined Mr. Long, 
who said that Cross^^ the pursuivant coming from Mr. Attorney with the 
directions desired a warrant in writing, and so Mr. Attorney sent him the 
letter before mentioned, and so he indicted them all as priests. And that 
day^® they were to be tried, he told the Lord Chief Justice Hyde that he 
had divers papers that did conduce to prove them priests or Jesuits, and 
he said he was ready to read them; and thereupon the Lord^^ Richardson 
said. We are upon a point whether they be priests or not, and they must 
have right^^ done them. Another judge said. We come to do right to all. 
The Lord Richardson asked him, if he had any other evidence. He said, 
he had no other but those papers, which he thought would give clear** 

Uhe. zis: *. 

» every particular question. *!. 
» but seemed oftentimes, ^i. 

which when he had done he was. X15. 
1" Council-board. Xi. 

» to have them brought before me, added. *!. 
"order. Xp.ii.is; *. 
"supposed. Xg-ii.is; *. 

" The gentleman and myself appointed for the service. Xii. 
" Mr. Cross. *3,6-io. 
i^ And the same day. *i. 
1' Lord Chief Justice. X3. 
^^ justice. X3. 
i» full. Xi-8. 



80 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 16 

satisfaction. The Lord Richardson said, all that was but discourse; and 
said further, What say you to the point, priest or no priest ? Mr. Long^" 
answered, I saw not these men made priests; and further said. In the house 
where they were taken, were found copes and vestments for priests; and 
he said,2^ I am ready to open all this, if you please, or to answer any 
questions. ^^ The papers contained divers examinations, and yet none 
were suffered to be read but one.^* 

Sir Robert Phelips. Never was there the like example or pre- 
cedent; if the judges give us no better satisfaction, they themselves will 
also be parties.'' 

A petition of complaint^* against Sir Henry Marten for disposing of-* 
the goods of one Brown, who died intestate,^^ to his own private use. 

Sir Henry Marten. If I prove not myself as clear in this as St. 
John Baptist let me be counted^^ a Jew.^^ 

This was referred to the Committee for Courts of Justice. 

At the Committee for Religion 

Mr. Strode moved that the Lord Chief Justice may be called to 
give account for his stay of justice, in staying the execution of the con- 
demned priest;-^ which he ought not to have done, though his Majesty 
signified his pleasure to the contrary. 

Sir Humphrey May. This was a thing so ordinary for a Chief 
Justice to do in Queen Elizabeth and King James their time, as also^° a 

" To which Mr. Long. *i. 
^ to the Lord Richardson, added. *i. 

^'i -which you shall ask concerning such things as I have ready, in the papers, added. *i. 
^ and that not being conceived a full proof, the rest were refused, added. *i. 
Mr. Selden reported from the Committee for the further examination of Mr. Long, concerning the pro- 
ceedings at Newgale against the Jesuits, whereby it plainly appeareth that the evidence tendered in the Court 
at Newgate, did plainly testify these men to be priests; yet the Lord Richardson did reject the same, against 
the sense of the rest of the judges and justices present; whereby it is plain he dealt under hand to save the 
Jesuits. T; *. 

M was preferred, added. X2-S. 

was presented, added. Xi. 
^taking. ri,2,8,io. 
^' and converting them. Xi. 
^''accounted. Xii; ri.ii. 
reckoned. *. 
committed. Xi,3,6. 
s« Judas. T7. 
"like Xii; r6. 

Jesuit. X4,S,9,lo; ri-s,7-9; *2. 
priests, X3; *i. 
Jesuits. Xi,2; 4>3. 
»» And notwithstanding. Xi-io.rS- 

b The remainder of what is given in the True Relation for this day is an account quite independent of 
that which precedes. See Introduction for a discussion of the character of the True Relation. 



February 17 TRUE RELATION 81 

declaration in the Star Chamber, that all condemned priests should be sent 
to the Castle of Wisbech, and from hence (though the King had given no 
order for the reprieve^O he might have taken his warrant for his proceedings. ^^ 
It was ordered that two members of the House shall be sent to each 
judge that was present at the Sessions at Newgate, who were said to be 
the Lord Chief Justice of the Kings Bench, and the Chief Justice of the 
Common Pleas,^^ Justice Whitelocke, Justice Jones, and Justice Croke. 

TUESDAY THE 17th OF FEBRUARY 

Mr. Chambers preferred another^ petition in^ complaint of a warrant 
newly proceeding from the Council-board,^ for stay of the merchants 
goods, unless they pay the duties that were due^ in King James his time. 

Sir John Eliot. You see, as by the last answer from the Exchequer 
touching the merchants, that the merchants were bound within that 
Court to sue for their own, and^ now they are debarred from all means of 
coming by their own goods. 

It was ordered* that the customers shall attend the House on Thurs- 
day® next, in the meantime it is referred to the former Committee. 

It was ordered a Committee of six shall collect and take all the names 
of those of the House at the Fast, and to meet at' Church by eight of 
the clock in the morning. 

It was ordered that a committee^ shall consider^ of the speediest way^ 
to put the merchants in possession of their goods, without which it is con- 
ceived^" we sit here in vain. 

"like X2.3.5,ir; Fy. 

reprieving. X4. 

replevy. Xi; ri-6,8,9,11; *i, 2,4,5. 

replevin. *3. 
3- have taken them and disposed of them otherwise. Xi-8. 

he might of taken them and disposed of them otherwise at his pleasure, and from these precedents he may 
lake a sufficient warrant for his proceedings. Xg.io. 
^ the two Chief Justices, Hyde and Richardson. X. 

February 17. 

' a new. Xp.is. 
2 in further. *6. 
^table. '^1-5,10,11. 
* paid. Xi. 
^ so. *i. 
that. -^S' 
6 Thursday morning. Xs. 

Tuesday. Fa, 4. 
' meet all at. T2. 
8 shall be to consider. f>3. 
' a speedy way. $. 
10 it is warned. *. 

a On Eliot's motion. Grosvenor, p. 217. 
b the former committee for the merchants. Grosvenor, p. 218. 



82 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 17 

The House sent to the judges to know their answer concerning their 
not proceeding against the priests, whose several answers being in writing 
under their hands were reported to the House in effect as followeth:'= 

Sir Thomas Hobby reported from the Lord Chief Justice Hyde, that 
he doth not remember any papers tendered by Mr. Long were rejected, or 
that he affirmed they were dangerous persons, and a college of Jesuits; 
but however, Mr. Long tendered nothing to prove them so, but that he 
held divers papers in his hand." 

Mr. Wandesford reported from the Lord Chief Justice Richardson, 
who said Mr. Long did discourse of the place and house, but did not press the 
reading of the^^ papers; neither did he know or doth know what was con- 
tained^^in the papers; neither knew of anything to prove the persons priests.^* 

Sir Thomas Barrington delivered the answer of Justice Jones, who 
saith that some papers were offered by Mr. Long, but he knew not the con- 
tents thereof, nor the reason why they were refused; but he came late for 
want of his health, and the second day was not there at all. 

Sir Miles Fleetwood delivered the answer of Justice Whitelocke 
who said he came late the first day,^^ and therefore understood not the 
business, and the second day was not there at all. 

Sir William Constable delivered the like answer from Justice Croke. 

They were all different^^ one from the other, and^^ gave little satis- 
faction to the House. 

Sir Thomas Barrington saith that, although Mr. Justice Jones did 
not write the name of the Lord Chief Justice Richardson, yet in discourse 
he named him to be the man that said, the point in proof is^^ whether 
they be priests or no priests. 

Sir Nathaniel Rich. Here is a charge of a high nature on^^ the 
judges by Mr. Long; that now Mr. Long may^" make good his charge, or 
suffer for it, for (said he) there were witnesses enough in the Court. 

" My Lord Chief Justice Hyde said that Mr. Long said he had such papers and did offer to read them. *io. 

"any. *i. 

^* intended. Xs- 

^^ Jesuits. X; ri,3,4,8. 

16 by reason of extraordinary occasions, added. Xi. 

for want of his health, added. X2. 
•• in their answers, added. Xs. 
»' which. *io. 
Wis not. ri,3-6,8,9; *. 
i» laid on. Xs- 
20 / desire that Mr. Long may. X2,ii. 

/ desire therefore that Mr. Long may. Xi. 

It were fitting therefore that Mr. Long might. X3. 

And moved that Mr. Long may now. Xp.io. 

A nd moved that Mr. Long might. X4,s. 

that therefore he may he sent for to. XiS- 
These reports were made at the Committee for Religion. Grosvenor p. 218. 



February 19 TRUE RELATION 83 

It was ordered that Mr. Long should attend the House^^ on Thursday 
morning. 

It was further ordered that the justices about the Town^^ shall be re- 
quired to deliver^^ in all the names of the Recusants remaining about the 
Town, and their conditions, and of what country they be.^* 

It was moved" that the gentlemen of the Inns of Court and of Chan- 
cery shalP^ give" in their knowledge what Recusants are there. ^^ 

Sir John Stanhope moved that the Court may give in the names of 
the Recusants there, and likewise by what warrant they be about the 
Town,29 and what public charge of office any of these persons have. Also 
what priests and Jesuits are in any prison in or about London, for they are 
at liberty to go sometimes five miles to say mass. 

WEDNESDAY THE 18th OF FEBRUARY 

A public Fast was kept by this House at Westminster, where there 
were three sermons, one by Mr. Harris, lecturer of St. Margaret, the 
second by Mr. Harris of Hanwell, the third by Mr. Fitz-Jeoffery.^ 

THURSDAY THE 19th OF FEBRUARY 

The customers did appear to answer to the violation of the privilege 
of Parliament by delaying of a merchants goods that is a member of the 
House. 

Mr. RoUes, the merchant, said, that he landed his goods, and one 
Carmarthen seized them, and said,^ he knew he was a Parliament man; 
and that he took them not alone, but, he said, if he had been alone, he 
would have done what he did. And upon the fifteenth day of January, 

" he here. Xis; *; ri-6.8,9; *. 
be there. Ty. 

22 this time. *. 

23 give. Xi-8. 
bring. Ts-7,ii. 

2* and what charge or office they bear. X3. 
^ordered. *i-6,io,ii; Ti. 
2« may. *. 
" also deliver. Xi-8. 

*' The gentlemen of Inns of Court and Chancery are to do the like. Xp.iS- 
29 by warrant the names of those that be about the Town. *3. 
by warrant that be about the Town. *2. 

February 18. 

1 which continued that whole day, added. X2. 

February 19. 

1 and when he seized them, he said. Xi. 



84 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 19 

Mr. Rolles said he demanded the privilege of ParHament and was denied it, and 
upon the twentieth of January, he had other goods seized and taken away.* 

Mr. Dawes, a customer, was called to the Bar and was asked by what 
authority he took Mr. Rolles his goods. He said by virtue of a warrant 
sent from his Majesty, and being asked if Mr. Rolles demanded privilege, 
he said he knew Mr. Rolles was a Parliament man, and had privilege for 
his person, but not for his goods as he conceived. And he said he did not 
inform the Lords of the Council that Mr. Rolles demanded privilege of 
Parliament.^ 

Sir Humphrey May. The King and the Council took notice that 
this man was a Parliament man, and it was the first time, and it was for 
the Kings revenue, and for such duties Parliament privileges never held.^ 

Sir Peter Heyman. Our mouths are stopped if this be the Kings 
revenue.^ 

Mr. Dawes was called in again and asked for what duties he took them, 
; and he said for such duties as were received and paid in King James his 
time, and that they were^ for Tonnage and Poundage, and he said he was 
commanded by the King, that if he should be asked for what duties, he 
should make this answer; and withal he protested that he knew not that 
privilege of Parliament extended to mens goods, which if he had known, 
he would rather have suffered in his own particular, than in the least 
thing to have violated the same.^ 

Mr. Carmarthen was called in, who said he took Mr. Rolles his goods 
for duties paid in King James his time, and said he knew Mr. Rolles was a 
Parliament man, and that Mr. Rolles told him he was to be privileged, 
whereunto he answered that he had no commission to spare him. And if 
the whole body of the House were contained^ in him, I said, I could not do 
otherwise; and if I said I could'' not, it was because I could not.' 

= Mr. Dawes, one 0/ the customers called in to ans-iver the point of privilege in taking Mr. Rolles his goods, 
being a member of this House, saith, he took Mr. Rolles his goods by virtue of a commission under the great 
Seal; and other warrants remaining in the hands of Sir John Eliot: That he knew Mr. Rolles to be a Par- 
liament man, and that Mr. Rolles demanded his privilege, but he did understand that his privilege did only 
extend to his person and not to his goods. ■*; T; *. 

3 and it was the first time that for the Kings revenue and for duties. Parliament privilege ever held, 
as I conceive, added. X2,4,6,7. 

* if the Kings revenue be questioned. '^lo. 

5 Mr. Dawes further saith, that he took those goods for such duties as were due in King James his time; 
and that the King sent for him on Sunday [Saturday *; Monday, T?] last, and commanded him to make no 
further answer. *; T; *. 

s contracted. X3. 

' Mr. Carmarthen, another customer, called in, saith, he knew Mr. Rolles to be a Parliament man; and 
that he told Mr. Rolles that he did not find any Parliament man exempted in their Commission; and if all the 
body of the House [Parliament, Sts] were in him, he would not deliver the goods; if he said he would not, it 
was because he could not. ■*; T; $. 

■> This is what Mr. Dawes the customer said about Mr. Rolles (Grosvenor, p. 221; Nicholas, p. 155). 
It was the customers, not the merchants, who were being examined. 

b and that they were should read and being demanded whether they were. See Nicholas, p. 155-56; 
Grosvenor, p. 221. 

^ would. Nicholas, p. 156. 



February 20 TRUE RELATION 85 

Sir John Eliot. I rise up rather to give occasion to others than to 
deliver my own opinion myself. We see it is not only for the interest of the 
goods of a member of this House, but also for the interest of this House; 
if we let this go, we shall not be able to sit here. Here are two degrees, 
or steps, to come to our conclusion: the first whether we conceive these 
parties to be delinquents or no, and to have violated our privileges, whether 
one or both; and if they be delinquents, what punishment they shall merit. 

Mr. Wandesford moved that the delinquency of these men may be 
declined for the present, and that we may first go to the King by way of 
Remonstrance, considering the matter from whence this doth arise; if it^ 
were a single privilege, it were easily determined. 

Mr. Selden. If there be any near the King^ that doth misinterpret 
and misrepresent our actions, let the curse light on them and not on us. 
And, believe me,^° it is high time to right ourselves; and until we vindi- 
cate ourselves in this, it will be in vain for us to sit here. 

Sir Nathaniel Rich moveth not to proceed in this, until it be by 
a select committee considered of,^^ in respect^^ the King himself gave order 
to stay those goods, though^^ the goods of a Parliament man. 

Sir John Eliot. The heart-blood of^* the Commonwealth receiveth 
life from the privilege of this House. ^^ 

It is resolved by question that this shall be presently taken into con- 
sideration; and, being conceived to be a business of great consequence, it 
is ordered that the House shall be resolved into a committee for more 
freedom of debate. 

Mr. Herbert in the Chair of this Committee. 

FRIDAY THE 20th OF FEBRUARY 

A petition of complaint of a conspiracy against a mans life was pre- 
sented against^ the Lord Deputy of Ireland and others, to get^ the estate 

^ there. *i-4,6-ii. 
» his Majesty. X. 
»«»<. X15; S['2,4-ii; T2-12; *. 
" until there be a select committee to consider of it. * 3. 

but by a select committee. Xi. 
i^ regard. Xa.ii; *i, 2,4,5. 
" though they be. *6. 

" of the liberty of. 'J'3,6-9; ri,io; •I'i,2,4,5. 
" Parliament. Xis. 

February 20. 

^ of a mans life by. *3.5-9; Ti-q; $3. 

for a mans life by. Xp.ii. 

2 who sought to gel. X3. 



86 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 20 

of the petitioner to their own use; which was referred to the Committee 
for Courts of Justice.* 

Sir John Wolstenholme, another^ of the customers, called in, saith, 
that he was commanded from the King^ to say that the goods were taken 
for duties, and no more; that he sought not to farm^ the customs, and told 
the King, being sent for to^ him, that he was not willing to deal therein, 
until the Parliament had granted the same.^ 

At a Committee oj the Whole House about the Customs 

Whereupon the warrant* from the King to the customers was read^ in 
hac verba. 

Carolus Dei Gratia, Angliae Scotiae, Franciae and Hiberniae Rex, 
Fidei Defensor etc. To the Lord Treasiirer, Chancellor and Barons of 
the Exchequer, and to the customers of otir ports, etc. 

Whereas the Lords of our Coimcil, taking into their consideration our 
revenues, and finding that Tonnage and Poundage is a principal revenue of 
our crown, and hath been continued many ages, have therefore ordered, 
that all those duties of subsidies, customs, and imposts, as they were in 
the two^" and twentieth year of King James,^^ and as they shall be ap- 
pointed by us under our Seal, to be levied. 

Know ye, that we, by the advice of the Lords of our Council,^^ declare 
our^^ will hereby, that all those duties be levied and collected as they were 
in the time of our said father, and in "such manner as we shall appoint. 
And if any person refuse to pay, then our will is, that the Lords of our 
Council, and the Lord Treasurer, shall commit to prison such so refusing, 
until they conform themselves. And we give full power to all our officers 
to receive, levy, and collect the same; and we command our barons and all 
our officers from time to time to give all assistance to the farmers of the 
same, as fully as when^* they were collected by Act^^ of Parliament. 

The lease made from the King to the customers was also read. 

' one. X. 

• the King commanded him. Xp.ii.is. 

• he was sought to to farm. *i. 

• hy. *2. 
ithem. Xii. 

until his Majesty had it granted by Parliament. X3. 

8 The commission or warrant. X. 

» in the House, added. X2,3, 5-10,15. 
"one. Xp; *i. 

" our late royal father, added. *i. 
" Privy Council. Xi. 
w and. X2. 
M if. X2. 
^* authority. X9; *r. 

» C/. Grosvenor, p. 225; C.J. i;93i; Nicholas, p. 158. 



February 21 TRUE RELATION 87 

Mr. Selden conceiveth the case of these three customers to differ in 
the degrees of their offences. 

First, for Sir John Wolstenholme, whatever he saith here, he hath 
often confessed that the goods were taken for Tonnage and Poundage; so 
that as he brake the privilege in taking the goods , so Hkewise in swearing^^ 
one thing, and the contrary plainly appearing upon proof and his own 
confession, he plainly deserves punishment. 

Secondly, Mr. Dawes his case" differeth only, in^* that Sir John Wol- 
stenholme is a patentee, and Mr. Dawes only a sharer. 

Thirdly, Mr. Carmarthens case^^ differeth in saying, if all the Parlia- 
ment were in him, he would not deliver the goods. 

It was ordered^ that Wolstenholmes case shall be first decided; and 
the point is, whether by the lease Sir John Wolstenholme, having seized 
the goods, hath interest or no, or whether he be only an accountant to 
the King or not. 

Mr. Glanvile. Here is a sum of money advanced, a lease granted 
for certain years, a certain rent reserved ;2'' and though there be a cove- 
nant to these men, that if there be any loss it shall be abated, yet that^* 
cannot take away their interest. The substance of the affidavit^^ made 
by the customers in the Exchequer is that the goods of the merchants, 
seized by them and remaining in the Kings store-house, were seized only 
for duties to the King mentioned in a commissions^ imder the Kings 
signet ;2^ and that themselves, the customers, had no interest or pretence 
of interest in the goods. ^^ 

SATURDAY THE 21st OP FEBRUARY 

A petition was preferred^ by Mr. Thomas Symons, in fiirther com- 
plaint of the customers; and the two shillings and six pence of^ the 

»• saying. Ti. 

" cause. *. 

18 in this. X3,9. 

^* cause. *i,3-S. 

*" received. ^6,7; ri-6,8,9.ii. 

a he. $3. 

^^ offences. *i,3. 

» made, added. Ti. 

M hand. X3. 

« interest therein. *i. 

»> On Eliot's motion. Grosvenor, p. 226. 

February 21. 

^delivered. *i. 
tendered, ■^s. 
2 upon. X4; T; *. 



88 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 21 

currants granted the Earl of Arundel :^ which is referred to the Committee 
for Merchants. 

Sir Robert Pye saith, the Earl of ArundeP hath delivered in his 
patent to the King two months since. 

At the Committee for Merchants 

Mr. Littleton. Before we go to the point of delinquency, let us con- 
sider the point of law. The Parliament is prorogued until* the twentieth 
of October, a member of the House hath his goods seized for the King; 
and he, demanding privilege of the House, whether he ought to have it 
or no. The questions are three: 

First, whether a member of the House is^ to have privilege of® his 
goods. I answer, The ground of all privilege is for public service for the 
general good of the Commonwealth, therefore all private interest must 
yield and give place, and the priyilege of Parliament exceeds and is above^ 
all other privileges and courts,*' and Parliament only can decide Parlia- 
ment privileges, not any other judges or courts. ; No man denies that 
privilege of person is to be had, the same reason is for goods, for if he^ 
be impleaded for his goods, he cannot attend to sit here. A man cannot 
distrain a member of the House of Parliament^ for rent in time of Parlia- 
ment, but for arrearages afterwards^" he may. He is not to be impleaded 
in" action personal, nor his goods to be seized. A record and Act of 
Parliament remains in the Exchequer that, because a member of Parlia- 
ment is in the Kings royal protection, it might be high treason for one 
to kill such a man;^^ ^nd the Kings answer made it a law; and for the 
judges to undermine privilege of Parliament were to supersede and make 
void the law. 

2. The second question is, whether a Parliament man ought to have 
privilege upon the prorogation notwithstanding the^^ proclamation of a 
new prorogation. I answer, he ought to have it. We are to have it 
sixteen days coming and going. 

* Lord of Arundel. Xi-8,io; *?; T; <l>i,4,5. 

Lord Arundel. '*'3.5.6,9.ii; *2,3. 
*lo. X2, 4,5,9- 
s ought. X3,5. 
^Jor. X9. 
' goes beyond. Xi. 
e a man. X3. 
« the House. X3.S. 

this House. X2. 
1" after the ending of the Parliament. Xi. 
" in an. X2,4. 
J' kill a Parliament man. X9. 
13 a. X2-4. 



February 21 TRUE RELATION 89 

3. Whether privilege of goods doth hold against the King. I say, 
it doth hold; the King is never so high in point of justice^* as in Parlia- 
ment. In my Lord Stanhopes case, the last Session, it was resolved that 
in all cases, except for felony^^ or breach of the peace, Parliament privi- 
lege doth hold: he citeth the case of Sir Robert Howard in the High 
Commission,* that all are privileged imless it be in case of treason; and 
divers other arguments to this piirpose were made.^^ 

Sir Robert Phelips. Thus you see how fast" the prerogative of 
the King doth trench upon the liberty of the subjects, and how hardly it 
is recovered. Citeth many precedents wherein^ ^ the goods of a member 
of Parliament were privileged from seizure in the Exchequer. In 19th" 
of Elizabeth, it was resolved in Parliament, that twenty days before, and 
twenty days after, was the time of privilege. 

Sir Humphrey May. That in this debate we may tie ourselves to 
point of law and authority, and not to point of reason.^" And conceiveth 
that no privilege lieth against the King in point^^ of his duty. 

Sir Francis Seymour. I desire it may be first debated, whether 
this case^^ doth concern the King or no ; for I conceive that these customers 
have not made good that there was any right, here is only art used to 
entitle the King. I conceive it to be an high offence for any man to lay 
the scandal upon the King of every project. 

1* Slate. Xg. 

^^ cases but for. Xi. 
cases unless it be for treason. Xg.io. 
cases for. X3,s. 

i« Mr. Littleton argueth, whether a member of the House hath his goods privileged upon a prorogation, 
being seized for the King. All privilege is allowed for the benefit [good, *i] of the Commonwealth, and the 
Parliament privilege is above any other, and the Parliament only can decide privilege of Parliament, not any 
other judge or court. That a man may not distrain for rent in Parliament time, but for all arrearages after the 
Parliament he may distrain. He is not to be impleaded [distrained, *9; employed, *i] in any action per- 
sonal, nor his goods seized in the Exchequer. A record and act of Parliament by petition, thai because a servant 
of a member of Parliament is in the Kings royal protection, that it might be high treason to kill a Parliament 
man; and the King answered [affirmatively, *i; accordingly, ■*!, added] which made it a law. And for the 
judges to determine privilege of Parliament were to supersede [super-head, X15; ^6,7,9; 108; 795; ri-3, 5,6,8-11; 
suspend, r7] and make void the law. For the prorogation, the privilege stands good until the day of proro- 
gation, notwithstanding a proclamation of a new prorogation. That the King is never so high in point of State 
as in the Parliament; citeth the case of Sir Robert Howard in the High Commission. All privileges [and all 
privilege is good, *l] unless in felony, treason, or breach of the peace. Xii.is; *; T; <t>. 

^'' fast and how far. Xi-io,is. 
first. •*!. 
much. *8. 

IS The precedents are many which show. Xli. 

" 12. *I. 

20 treason. *2-7. 

21 case. Xi-8. 

22 cause. *S. 
care. Ti. 

a See Hatsell, 1:180-81. 



90 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 21 

Mr. Glanvile. Here is a cunning affidavit in^^ the Exchequer to 
entitle the King; a mere cunning project, and an offence of an high nature, 
to shelter their projects under the command of the Crown.^* 

Secretary Coke. The point in question is not the right of the 
subject, but the right of the Parliament privilege, and that particularly 
in the case of Mr. RoUes ; and this is only now in question. 

Sir John Strange ways. ^^ I know^^ no reason why we should draw 
a question upon ourselves, which we need not, especially between the 
King and us. I conceive it is plain that these customers took the goods 
in their own right and not in the Kings. In this the privilege is plainly 
broken, and therein the question is^' easily determined.^* 

Mr. Banks. In this case there is no interposing of the Kings right, 

and the King by his proclamation this Parliament hath declared as^' 

much. That the Courts at^" Westminster do grant twelve days privilege 

to any man to inform his counsel, much more the Court of Parliament 

\ are'^ to have their privilege. The Kings command cannot extend to 

I authorize any man to break the privilege, no more than it will warrant 

1 an entry upon a mans land without process of law. 

Mr. Solicitor. If the King^^ j^ath no right, how can he make a lease? 
Then this pretended interest^^ of the customers must be void; and therefore 
the goods must be taken, not in their own right, but in the right of the King. 

Mr. Selden. If there were any right, the pretended right is in the 
subject.^ 

First, whether privilege in goods. 

Secondly, whether the right were in the customers only. 

Thirdly, whether privilege against the King. 

1. If the Lords have no privilege of Parliament for their goods, then 
they have no privilege at all, for they are privileged in their persons out 
of Parliament. 

2. For the point of interest, it is plain, no^^ kind of covenant can 
alter the interest; and questionless, had the case^^ in the Exchequer 

»» made in. X3. 
»« King or crown. T2-^. 
M 5»> John Eliot. X6. 
»see. X. 

" wherein it is. *; T; ♦. 
'• undermined. ^6. 
« thus. *2. 
•»o/. ri,3.6.8,io. 
" ought. X3. 
M/ie. I'l-s, 10,11. 
'bright. Xi-8,io; *i, 2,8,10,1 1. 
" customers. X6. 
K M no. T. 

''cause. X9,ii; ■ir6,7,9; Ty; *i. 
if that the case. ■^3. 



February 21 TRUE RELATION 91 

appeared to the Barons, as it doth to us, they would never have proceeded 
as they did. 

3. If our goods may be seized in the Exchequer, be it right or wrong, 
we were^^ then as good have nothing. 

Sir Nathaniel Rich. It was recorded^^ the last Session in the 
Lords^^ House, and citeth other^" precedents'^ in this House, that the 
servant of a member of Parliament ought to have privilege in his goods. 

Decided by question that'^ ^ Parliament man ought to have privilege 
in his goods. 

Mr. Noy. That'^ these customers had neither commission nor 
command to seize; therefore, without doubt, we may proceed safely to 
the other question, that** the privilege is broken by the customers, with- 
out relation to any commission or command of the King. 

Secretary Coke. It is in the commission to seize. 

Whereupon'^ the commission was read,*^ and there was no such thing 
found therein, but only to levy.'^ 

Sir Humphrey May. Mr. Dawes mentioned'* that he seized those 
goods by virtue of a commission and other warrants remaining in the 
hands of Sir John Eliot; he moved therefore that those warrants may be 
seen, whether there be not command therein to seize the goods. 

Sir Nathaniel Rich. This days debate much rejoiceth'^ me, 
especially the motion made by Mr. Noy, whereby it is plain we have a 
way open to go to this question, without relation to the Kings commission 
or command; and I desire, ^° in respect there appeareth nothing before us 
that doth encumber us,^^ that we may presently go to the question.^^ 

^'•had. Xi,2; ri.6,8. 
^* ordered. Xi-8,is. 
" lower. 96-9. 

in this. Xli.IS. 
«» many. X3. 

and there are divers other. Xii.is. 
" proceedings. *3. 
" The question being decided. *i. 

And it hath been decided by question that. Xii. 
" / see not how. Xi. 

/ think that. Xis. 
'-*for. Xi-8; Tii. 
«5 Then. X3. 
*' but the commission being read. X; *; ri-7,9,11; *. 

as followeth, added. rs,7. 
*'' it is not found to be there. *; ri-4,6,8-10; *. 

it is not found. T5. 

no such thing appeareth. Xii. 
•' saith. Tn,T. 
"joyeth. *. 
^0 regard. Xi. 
^^ nothing to encumber us. Xi,2,4,s; Tii. 

nothing to the contrary that may encumber us. *6. 
" and desires it, in respect there appears nothing before us that doth encumber the question. T; *. 



92 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 162Q February 21 

Sir Humphrey May again desireth that these warrants may be 
looked into^' before we go^* to the question. 

Mr. Kirton. In respect^^ this honourable gentleman presseth this 
point so far, the^^ warrants may be read," that it may appear with what 
judgment this House hath proceeded.^^ 

Mr. Glanvile. I consent these warrants be sent for and read; but 
withal, if any thing arise^^ that may produce any thing of ill consequence, 
let it be considered from whence®" it doth come. 

The Privy Councellors here are content with this motion. 

The warrants being sent for®^ and read,®^ j^ is plain there is no 
warrant®^ to seize. 

Mr. Kirton. If now there be any thing®* of doubt, I desire these 
honourable persons to make their objections.®' 

Sir Humphrey May. I rejoice when I can go to Coiurt able to 
justify your®® proceedings. I confess I see nothing now but that we may 
safely®^ proceed®^ to the question. 

Secretary Coke saith as much. 

Mr. Hakewill argueth against privilege in the time of proro- 
gation.®' 

Mr. Noy saith he had^" no doubt but privilege was in force in time 
of prorogation, until he heard this argument of Mr. Hakewill; and saith, 
he hath heard nothing from him yet that doth alter his opinion; and 

»' Ttai and looked into. rs,6. 

perused. Xis. 
" Proceed. ri,3,io. 
» Because, ri-4. 
M / desire the. *s. 

and desireth. *6. 
'^ it may be granted, ^&,9. 

**that it may appear with what judgment this House hath proceeded, [doth proceed, X7I let it be so as he 
desires [requireth, X3]. X 1-8, 10, 15; Tii. 

" if any thing be read of which ariseth, r2-4. 
'"whom. *i,2,io. 
»^ brought. Xi,2,4-n, 

brought in. X3. 

brought forth. Xis. 
'2 examined. T7. 
^ command or warrant. X3,4; Tii. 

command. X2,5. 
** manner. Xi-8; Tii. 

•« / desire there may be objections made by these honourable men. *3. 
•» our. *2. 
*'' easily, r 1,6-1 2. 
>»go. X1.3-S.1s; rii. 
•• saith he is glad to hear that it is so. *3. 
" made. *i. 



February 23 TRUE RELATION 93 

citeth a case wherein the Lords House hath this very prorogation adjudged 
the privilege. ^^ 

Mr. Hakewill saith that he is glad to hear it is so, and he is now of 
the same opinion.''^ 

It was decided by question, that Mr. Rolles ought to have privilege 
of Parliament for his goods seized 30 October, 5 January, and all times''' 
since. 

This Committee is adjourned until Monday, and the customers are to 
attend then. 

MONDAY THE 23rd OF FEBRUARY 

At the Committee about the Customers and the Seizure of Mr. Rolles his Goods 

Sir Robert Phelips. Let us now begin with the delinquency of 
these men, the customers, and sever them.^ 

Mr. Littleton. I should be very sorry to see this House spare 
offenders, and pimish free men; if any offence be done, some'' have done' 
the crime. Let us* examine who they are, and let them^ be made ex- 
amples^ to deter others. 

Sir Humphrey May. I will never cease to give you the best advice 
I can. We all agree a wound^ is given. We have wine and oil before us. 
If we go to punish delinquents^ there is vinegar in the wound;' therefore 
think on some course to have restitution made. 

Sir John Eliot. The question^" is whether we shall first go to the 
restitution," or to the point of delinquency ;^2 but now some raise up 

" the case of privilege. *S. 

adjudged one privileged. Xp.io. 

/ see nothing in it to alter my opinion, for in a case remaining in the Lords House upon record, there 
is this very word prorogation adjudged privileged. Xii. 

" Mr. Hakewill submits to Mr. Noy and so they both with the rest conclude. Xis. 
" and also since. ^3. 

and ever since. *8,9. 

February 23. 

1 and let us proceed with diligence to do what may conduce to the honour of this House, and justice of the 
same. Xi. 

2 some men. X5. 

s committed. X 1 1 , 1 5. 
« And let them. *io. 
thoroughly search and, added. Xr. 

5 7 heartily wish and desire they may. Xi. 

6 to posterity, added. Xi. 
T word. Xis; 'i'a-ii; T. 
^delinquency. Xis; *• 

• wine. r2-4. 
'» point. Xi. 
thing. Xg. 
1' point of restitution. Ts. 
" </itf point of restitution or delinquency. Xi-io. 



94 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 23 

difficulties in oppositions^ to^* the point of delinquency of breach of Par- 
liament, and other fears. I meet with this both here and elsewhere. 
Take heed you fall not upon a rock. I am confident that this woiild be 
somewhat difficult, were it not for the goodness and justice of the King. 
Let us do that which is just, and his goodness is so clear, that we need 
not mistrust. Let these terrors that are threatened^^ light on them that 
made them. Why should we fear the justice of the King, when we do 
that which is just? Let there be^^ no more memory of fear of breaches^'^ 
' of Parliament, and let us now go to the delinquency of these men, and 
that is the way^* to prociu-e satisfaction. 

Secretary Coke. We laboured the last day to bring us to our^^ 
end, and now we fall to this issue, to proceed to the dehnquency of these 
men. Our ground is because they had no command^" from his Majesty. 
I must speak plain English; his Majesty took notice of our labour last 
Saturday, and that we endeavoured to sever the act of the customers 
from his Majesties command. His Majesty commanded me to tell you, 
that it concerns him in an high degree of justice and honour; that the 
truth be not concealed, which is that what they did was either by his 
own direct order and command, or by order of the Council-board, himself 
being present and assisting, and therefore he will not have it divided from^^ 

, his act. 

I Report was made from the Grand Committee, that they took into 

their consideration the violation of the liberty of the House by the cus- 
tomers; and at last they resolved, that a member of the House ought to 
have privilege of person and goods, and the command of his Majesty is 

/ so great,22 that they^^ leave it to the House.^^ 

/ Secretary Coke reported that message and command from his 

Majesty, and said, that howsoever this House labours to sever the Kings^^ 
interest, his Majesty thinks that this distinction will not clear his honour 

^i operation. Xii; *S-7.9. 

'*o/. X2,3.S.9.II.I5; *3,S-7.9.io; Tii. 

«ow us, added. 'J'l. 

'" Let no fear divert us, let there be. Ts. 

iT fear of breaches. Xi.ii. 

fear or memory of breaches. T. 
18 only way. St'i. 
i*an. Xis; TS. 
2" commission. Xi. 
" denyed to be. 'J'p. 

22 6u< his Majesties command being so great. Xi-8; Tii. 

23 thought good lo, added. Xi. 

^* further to consider and determine therein, added. Xi. 
-^Ihis. *9. 



February 23 TRUE RELATION 95 

He is^^ the fountain of honour, and he will not be drawn^^ to do that which 
may touch him,^^ though others^^ may make distinctions. 

Sir Robert Phelips.^" I had rather pray to God^^ to direct us than to 
take upon me to give any direction now. The Kings honour, justice, and 
governments^ are now presented unto us, and^^ also the essential liberty 
of this House, and are we now fit for debate or counsel ? In the greatest 
retirements^ otir best thoughts are summoned to resolve what to do. 

Hereupon there were certain heads and articles of religion drawn up 
by consent of the whole House, intended to have been presented unto his 
Majesty, agreed upon at a subcommittee, the tenor whereof f olloweth -.^^ 

Heads and Articles Agreed upon by the House^^ 

1. That we call to mind, how that in the last Session of this Parlia- 
ment we presented to his Majesty an humble Declaration of the great 
danger threatened to this Chiirch and State, by divers courses and 
practices tending to the change and innovation of Religion. 

2. That what we then feared, we do now sensibly feel, and therefore 
have just cause to renew our former complaints therein.^^ 

3. Yet^s we do with all humble thankfulness acknowledge the great 
blessing we have received from Almighty God, in setting a King over us, 
of whose constancy, in the profession and practice of the true Religion 
here established, ^^ we rest fully assured,*" as likewise of his most pious 
zeal and careful endeavour for the maintenance and propagation thereof; 
being so far from having the least doubt of his Majesties remissness 

'^^ and he being. Xi-8; Tii. 
2' any ways, added. Xi. 
'^^ his honour. Xi; Ty. 

himself. Xii.is. 
2» other men. Xs. 
30 Coke. -ig. 
•Ji our God. Xi. 

/ stand up rather to pray to Cod than. XiS. 
^'^ goodness. Xis. 
'8 05. *io. 

together with. Xis. 

34 concernments. *!. 

35 and upon Wednesday the Heads of [or *i2] Articles for Religion being presented to the House, and read 
as followeth. *i,i2. 

^ Heads or .Articles to be insisted on concerning Religion, agreed on at the sub-committee of Religion 24 
Feb. 1628. Xio. 

Heads or Articles to be insisted on, and agreed upon at a Sub-Committee for Religion, the 25th of Feb- 
ruary 1628. *I,I2. 

37 herein. *l. 

38 That {yet nevertheless). *l. 

3' professed and maintained amongst us. Xi. 
40 satisfied and assured. Xi. 



96 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 23 

therein, that we next under God ascribe it unto his own princely''^ wisdom and 
goodness, that our Holy Religion hath yet any continuance^^ at all amongst us. 

4. But for that the pious intention and endeavour even of the best and 
wisest princes are often frustrated through the unfaithfulness and care- 
lessness of their ministers, and that in this kind we find a great unhappi- 
ness to have befallen his Majesty this way, we think, that being now 
assembled in Parliament to advise of the^' weighty and important affairs 
concerning Church and State,^ we cannot do a work more acceptable, 
than in the first place, according to the dignity of the matter, and 
necessity of the present occasions, faithfully and freely to make known, 
what we conceive may conduce to the preservation of Gods Religion, 
in great peril now to be lost, and therewithal the safety and tranquillity 
of his Majesty and this Kingdom threatened with certain dangers. 

For a clear proceeding therein we shall declare : 

First, what those dangers and inconveniences*^ are. 

Secondly, whence they arise. 

Thirdly, how in some sort, we hope they may be redressed. 

The dangers may appear partly from the consideration of the state 
of Religion abroad, and partly from the condition thereof within his Maj- 
esties own Dominions, and especially within this his Kingdom of England. 

From abroad we make these observations : 

1. First, the mighty and prevalent party, by which true Religion is 
actually opposed, and the contrary maintained. 

2. Secondly, their combined counsels, forces, attempts, and practices, 
together with a most diligent pursuit of their designs, aiming at the sub- 
version of all the Protestant Churches in Christendom. 

3. Thirdly, the weak resistance that is made against them. 

4. Fourthly, their victorious and successful enterprises, whereby the 
Churches of Germany, France, and other places are in a great part already 
ruined, and the rest in the most weak and miserable condition. 

In his Majesties own dominions these: 

1. First in Scotland, the stirs lately raised and insolences com- 
mitted by the Popish Party hath already not a little disquieted that 
famous church, of which (with comfort we take notice) his Majesty hath 
expressed himself exceeding sensible, and accordingly given most royal 
and prudent directions therein. 

i^;^; 2. Secondly, Ireland is now almost wholly overspread with Popery, 
swarming with Friars, Priests, Jesuits, and other superstitious persons of 

*i particular. Xi. 
** countenance. *i. 
«»nony. Xi. 
** Commonwealth. Xi. 
*» main enemies. Xi. 



February 23 TRUE RELATION 97 

all sorts, whose practice it is daily to seduce his Majesties subjects from 
their allegiance/® and to cause them to adhere to his enemies. That even 
in the City of Dublin, in the view of the State, where not many years 
since, as we have been very credibly informed, there were few or none 
that refused to come to Church, there are lately restored and erected for 
Friars, Jesuits, and idolatrous Mass-Priests, thirteen houses, being more in 
number than the parish churches within the city, besides many more like- 
wise erected in the best parts of the Kingdom; and the people almost 
wholly revolted from our Religion, to the open exercise of Popish super- 
stition. The danger from hence is further increased by reason of the 
intercourse which the subjects of all sorts in the Kingdom have into Spain, 
and the Arch- Duchesses country; and that of late divers principal persons 
being Papists are trusted with the command of soldiers, and great 
numbers of the Irish are acquainted with the exercise of arms and martial 
discipline, which heretofore hath not been permitted, even in times of 
greatest security. 

Lastly, here in England we observe : 

1. An extraordinary growth of Popery, insomuch that in some 
counties, where in Queen Elizabeths time there were few or none known 
to be Recusants, now there are above two^'' thousand, and all the rest 
generally apt to revolt. 

2. A bold and open allowing of their Religion, by frequent and 
public resort to mass in multitudes without control, and that even 
to the Queens Court, to the great scandal of his Majesties'** government. 

3. Their extraordinary insolence, for instance the late erecting of a 
College of Jesuits in Clerkenwell, and the strange proceedings thereupon 
had^^ in^° favour of them. 

4. The subtile and pernicious spreading of the Arminian faction, 
whereby they have kindled such a fire of division in the very^^ bowels 
of the State, as if not speedily extinguished, it is of itself sufficient to ruin 
our Religion, by dividing of us from the Reformed Churches abroad, 
and^^ amongst ourselves at home; and by casting doubts upon the Re- 
ligion professed and established, which if faulty or questionable in four 
or five^^ articles, will be rendered^^ suspicious to unstable minds in all the 
rest, and incline them to Popery, to which those tenets in their own nature 

«• obedience. Xi. 

"twenty. Xi. 

*» gracious and religious, added. Xi. 

** used. •4' I. 

^0 the countenance and, added. Xi. 

'1 belly and, added. Xi. 

^^ separating, added, *i. 

" three or four, * i . 

" doubtful and, added. Xi. 



98 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 23 

do prepare the way. So that if our ReHgion be suppressed and destroyed 
abroad, disturbed in Scotland, lost in Ireland, undermined and almost out- 
dared in England, it is^^ manifest that our danger is very great and imminent. 
The causes of which danger here, amongst divers others, we conceive 
to be chiefly these :^^ 

1. The suspension or negligent execution^ '^ of the laws*^ against 
Popery: instance, in the late proceedings against the College of Jesuits. 

2. Divers letters sent by Mr. Attorney^^ into the country, for stay 
of proceedings against Recusants.^'' 

3. The publishing and^^ defending points of Popery in sermons and 
books without^^ punishment at all: instance, Bishop^^ Mountagues three 
books, viz., The Gagg, Innovation of Saints, and his Appeale; Mr. Cosins 
horary; Bishop of Gloucesters sermons. 

4. The bold and unwarranted introducing, practising, and defending 
of sundry new ceremonies,** and laying of injunctions upon men by*^ 
governors of the Church and others without** authority, in conformity*^ 
to the Church of Rome; as for example, in some places erecting of altars, 
in others changing the usual and prescribed manner of placing the Com- 
munion-Table, and setting it at the upper end of the chancel north and 
south, in imitation of the high altar, by which name they also call it, and 
adorn it with candlesticks, which by the injunctions Anno. 10°^^ Eliz. 
were to be taken away.*^ And also do make obeisance by bowing there- 
unto; commanding men to stand up at Gloria Patri; bringing men to 
question and trouble for not obeying that command, for which there is 
no''*' authority; enjoining that no woman be churched without a veil; 
setting up of pictures, lights, and images in churches; praying towards 
the east; crossing ad omneni motum et gestum. 

5. The false and counterfeit conformity of Papists, whereby they do 
not only evade the law, but obtain places of trust and authority: instance, 

" very apparent and loo, added. Xi. 

»« instanced in, added. S^i. 

" operation. X9. 

^^ thai are enacted, SiddeA. Xi. 

" Sir Robert Heath, his Majesties Attorney. ■*!. 

*" Papists. Xi. 

«' The open and common. Xi. 

*2 any manner of, added. Xi. 

•= Mr. X1.9. 

«■• of new invented ceremonies amongst us. Xi. 

8' 5ome instead of 6y. Xi. 

«« with. *3. 

" and near agreement, added. Xr. 

««/». X1.9. 

" and removed, added. Xi. 

'" can be found no good. X i . 



February 23 TRUE RELATION 99 

Mr. Browne of Oxford, and his treatise written to that purpose; the Bishop 
of Gloucester; and the now Bishop of Durham. 

6. The suppressing and restraint of the orthodox doctrine contained 
in the Articles of Religion, confirmed in Parliament 13° Eliz., according to 
the sense which hath been received publicly, and taught as the doctrine of 
the Church of England in those points wherein the Arminians differ from 
us and other of the Reformed Churches. Which sense of our Articles 
in those controverted points is known and proved, viz., 

1st, By the Book of Common Prayer established in Parliament. 

2dly, By the Book of Homilies, confirmed^^ by the Acts of Religion. 

3dly, By the Catechism concerning the points printed in the Bibles, 
and read in churches, and divers other impressions published by au- 
thority. 

4thly, By Bishop Jewels Works, commanded to be kept in all 
churches, that every parish may have one of them. 

5thly, The public determination of divines in^^ Universities. 

6thly, The determination of divinity professors published by au- 
thority. 

7thly, The resolution of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and other 
reverend bishops and divines assembled at Lambeth for this very purpose, 
to declare their opinions concerning these points. Anno 1595, unto which 
the Archbishop of York'* did likewise agree. 

8thly, The Articles of Ireland, though framed by the Convocation 
there, yet allowed by the''* State here. 

9thly, The suffrage of the British divines sent by our late sovereign 
King James'^ to the Synod of Dort. 

10thl3^ The uniform consent of our writers published by authority. 

llthly, Lastly, the censures, recantations, punishments, and sub- 
missions made, enjoined, and inflicted upon those that taught contrary 
thereunto, as Barrow and Barrett in Cambridge, and Bridges in 
Oxford. 

7. The publishing of books, and preaching of sermons, contrary to 
the former orthodox doctrine, and suppressing books written in defence 
thereof: instance. Bishop Mountagues Gagg and Appeale to Caesar, 
Mr. Jacksons book of The Essence and Attributes of God, Dr. Whites two 
sermons preached at Court, one upon the fifth of November, the other 
upon Christmas-day last ; and for orthodox books suppressed : instance, in 

'^ and approved, lidd&d. Xi. 

^i both the, added. 9i. 

" and all his province, added. ■*!. 

'* clergy and, added. *i. 

" in the [blank] year of his reign, added. *i. 



100 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 23 

all that have been written against Mr. Mountague and Cosin, yea even 
Bishop Carletons book. 

8. That these persons who have published and maintained such 
Popish, Arminian, and superstitious opinions and practices/^ and who 
are known to be unsound in ReHgion, are coimtenanced, favoiured,^^ and 
preferred: instance, Mr. Mountague made Bishop of Chichester; the 
late Bishop of Carlisle, since his last Arminian sermon preached at Court 
advanced to the Bishopric of Norwich; a known Arminian made Bishop 
of Ely; the Bishop of Oxford, a long suspected Papist, advanced to the 
Bishopric of Durham; Mr. Cosin advanced to dignity and a great living; 
Dr. Wrenn made Dean of Windsor and one of the High Commission. 

9. That some prelates, near the King,^^ having gotten the chief adminis- 
tration of ecclesiastical affairs under his Majesty, have discountenanced 
and hindered the preferment of those that are orthodox, and favoured such 
as are contrary: instance, the Bishops of Winchester and London in 
divers particulars. 

The remedies'^ we conceive may be these, viz., 

1. Due execution of laws against Papists. 

2. Exemplary punishment to be inflicted upon teachers, publishers, 
and maintainers of Popish opinions, and practising of superstitious cer- 
emonies; and some stricter laws in that case to be provided. 

3. The orthodox doctrine of our Church in these now^° controverted 
points by the Arminian sect, may be established^^ and freely taught, 
according as it hath been hitherto generally received, without any altera- 
tion or innovation, and severe punishment by the same laws to be pro- 
vided^2 against such as shall publish either by word or writing any thing 
contrary thereunto. 

4. That the said books of Mountague and Cosin may be burned. 

5. That such as^ have been authors or abettors of those Popish 
and Arminian innovations in doctrine may be condignly punished. 

6. That some good order may be taken for licensing of books here- 
after. 

7. That his Majesty would be graciously pleased to confer bishoprics 
and other ecclesiastical preferments, with advice of his Privy Council, 
upon learned, pious, and orthodox men. 

'* and have divulged and published the same, added. Xi. 

" cherished, Xi. 

'« in some special extraordinary favour, added. Xi. 

'• of which abuses, added. *!. 

*Onew. Xi. 

•> confirmed, added. Xi. 

« proceeded. Xp. 

M That all those persons that. Xi. 



March 2 TRUE RELATION ■ 101 

8. That bishops and clergymen being well chosen, may reside upon 
their charge, and with all diligence and fidelity perform their several 
duties, and that accordingly they may be countenanced and preferred. 

9. That some course may in this Parliament be considered of, for 
providing competent means to maintain a godly and able minister in every 
parish church of this Kingdom. 

10. That his Majesty woiild be graciously pleased to make a special 
choice of such persons for the execution of his Ecclesiastical Commissions, 
as are approved for integrity of life and soundness of opinion. ^^* 

Hereupon*^ the House was adjourned until Wednesday following. ^^ 

WEDNESDAY THE 25th OF FEBRUARY 

Upon Wednesday they met again and were^ by a message delivered 
from his Majesty by Secretary Coke adjourned over until Monday morning 
next following.^ 

THE PROTESTATIONS OF THE COMMONS IN PARLIAMENT 
ON MONDAY 2 MARCH 1628 

First, Whosoever shall bring in innovation in Religion, or by favour 
or countenance, seek to extend or introduce Popery or Arminianism or 

** doctrine. *i. 

•• After these Articles were drawn up and agreed upon. Xi. 

M and the Committee to sit. 
And in the mean time the Committee for Religion prepared certain Articles which they intended to hav€ 
presented to his Majesty as the Protestations of the whole House as followeth. [Then follows the Protestations 
of March 2nd in all but Xg which here gives the Heads] added in Xi-io; Tii. 

• The motion that led up to these Articles was made by Sir Robert Harley on January 29. On the 
same day Pym reported from the Committee of Religion a "Frame of a Declaration" which was the 
groundwork of the later Articles. On February 1 1 , Sir Nathaniel Rich moved that a subcommittee be appoint- 
ed to bring the "matters of fact or reasons concerning Religion" "into order for a report" (Grosvenor p. 194) • 
The work of putting the material into form was probably unfinished on the 23rd. It seems likely that 
the Committee, alarmed about possible dissolution, met on the next day, for the Articles were finished on 
that day, and they would no doubt have been presented to the House on Wednesday (2Sth), had there 
been an opportunity. 

These Articles are not mentioned in the Commons Journals nor in any of the private diaries and, 
for a very good reason; they never got beyond the sub-committee. The Articles sum up in an orderly 
manner all that was determined in the Grand Committee for Religion. Such a summary, drawn up for 
presentation to the King was the natural outgrowth of the work of the Grand Committee; without it 
the debates in Committee had been most futile. The Articles may be fairly compared to the Grand 
Remonstrance of the Long Parliament. That document too was a summing up of debates, a summing 
up, as it happens, by a Committee headed, as the Committee in 1629, by Pym. Both the Articles in 1629 
and the Grand Remonstrance were written to justify the case of the Parliament to the people. Further- 
more a careful reading of the two together will show that along the line of religion there was some simi- 
larity. It would be hazardous to go so far as to say that the Grand Remonstrance originated with these 
Articles in 1629, but the parallel between the two deserves mention. 

February 25. 

1 When the House should have sat again the Parliament was. Xii. 
^ And much speech of dissolving it, added. Xii. 



102 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 March 2 

other opinions disagreeing^ from the true and orthodox^ Church, shall be 
reputed a capital enemy to this Kingdom^ and Commonwealth. 

Secondly, Whosoever shall counsel or advise the taking and levying 
of the Subsidies of Tonnage and Poundage, not being granted by Parlia- 
ment, or shall be an actor or instrument therein, shall be likewise reputed 
an innovator in the government, and a capital enemy to this Kingdom and 
Commonwealth . 

Thirdly, If any merchant or person whatsoever shall volimtarily yield 
or pay* the said subsidies of Tonnage and Poundage, not being granted by 
Parliament, he shall likewise be reputed a betrayer of the liberties of 
England and an enemy to the same.^ 

SIR JOHN ELIOT AND MR. SELDEN, MONDAY 2 MARCH» 

Sir John Eliot. God knows I now speak with all duty to the 

King. It is true the misfortunes we siiffer are many, we know what 

, discoveries have been made;^ how Arminianism creeps in and undermines 

1 us, and how Popery comes in upon us; they mask not in strange disguises, 

\ but expose' themselves to the view of the world. In search whereof we 

■have fixed our eyes not simply on the actors (the Jesuits and priests), 

but on their masters, they that are in authority, hence it comes we suffer. 

The fear of them makes these interruptions. You have seen* prelates 

that are their abettors. That great Bishop of Winchester, we know 

Vhat he hath done to favour them; this fear extends to some others that 

contract a fear of being discovered, and they draw from hence this jealousy. 

This is the Lord Treasiu-er, in whose person all evil is contracted.^ I find 

him acting^ and building on those grounds laid by his Master,' the late 

Protestations. 

^differing. X15; *; Sloane 1199- 

contrary and disagreeing. Xi. 
= profession of our, added. X 1 , 1 5 . 
« our Church. Xi. 
< to pay. Xi. 

pay or cause to be paid. X15. 
» Before we will change our Religion or lose our liberties we will sacrifice our lives, added. Sloane Ii99. 

.Thereupon the House was dissolved by proclamation, added. Xi4,i5; *3,7; ri-4,7-10,12. 

Eliot-Selden. 

1 Xis gives this introduction: This day it was apparent that the Parliament should be dissolved where- 
upon after a general pause and sign of sorrow Sir Jo[hn] Eliot breaks silence. 

2 here in these Articles, added. 'I'r,i2. 
' express. Sloane 2531, f. 122. 

* some. X4,is; *i. 

• both for the innovation of Religion and invasion of our liberties, he being the great enemy of the Com- 
monwealth. I have traced him in all his actions, and, &dded. *i,i2. 

^working. Xio. 

''fatal Master. Sloane 2531; Stowe 156. 



f 



March 2 TRUE RELATION 103 

great Duke of Buckingham, and his spirit^ is moving for these interrup- 
tions. And from^ this fear they break ParHaments lest ParHaments 
should break them.^° I find him the head of all that great party the 
Papists, and all Jesuits and priests derive from him their shelter and 
protection. 

In this great question of Tonnage and Poundage, the instruments^^ 
moved at his command and pleasure; he dismays otir merchants, and 
invites strangers to come in to drive^^ our trade, and to serve their own 
ends. 

The Remonstrance^^ was put to the question, but the Speaker refused 
to do it; and said he was otherwise commanded from the King. 

Whereupon Mr. Selden spake as folio weth : 

You, Mr. Speaker, say you dare not put the question which we com- 
mand you; if you will not put it we must sit still, and thus we shall never 
be able to do any thing; they that come after you may say they have the 
Kings command not to do it. We sit here by commandment of the King, 
under the great Seal of England; and for you, you are by his Majesty 
(sitting in his royal chair before both Houses) appointed our Speaker, 
and yet now^* j^ou refuse to do us the office and service of a Speaker. ^^ 

THE AGITATION OF THE [LOWER] HOUSE OF PARLIAMENT ON THE 
LAST DAY OF THEIR SITTING BEING THE 2 OF MARCH 1628 

This day, being the last day of the Assembly, as soon as prayers 
were ended the Speaker went into^ the Chair, and delivered the Kings 
command for the adjoiunment of the House until Tuesday sevennight 
folio wing. 2 

The House returned him answer, that it was not the office of the 
Speaker to deliver any such command unto them, but for the adjourn- 
ment of the House it did properly belong unto themselves; and after they 

' secret. *. 

«/or. Xis; *3; ri: Add. MSS 33468. 

^"from this fear that they that break Parliaments will break him. ^S-io. 

» thereof were, added. *. 

'2oM<, added. *i,8-io; Sloane 2531; Stowe 156, 

13 This. X15. 

" under pretense of a message delivered unto you in private, added. X2,4,5,9. 

'^ Xis adds: Upon this the House began to side and a great part were willing to be gone, but the body 
thereof, desirous to publish and declare themselves touching religion and the property of the subject, drew up a 
short protestation; and whilst it was doing they commanded the doors to be shut and safely kept, which charge 
Sir Miles Hobart performed for he locked the door and put the keys in his pocket. [Then follow the Protesta- 
tions.) 

The Agitation. 

' being set in. *i. 

' being the tenth of March, added. X. 



104 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 March 2 

had settled some things they thought fit and convenient to be spoken of 
they wovild satisfy the King. 

The Speaker told them that he had an express command from the 
King as soon as he had^ delivered his message to rise; and upon that he 
left the Chair, but was by force drawn to it again by Mr. Denzil Holies, 
son to the Earl of Clare, Mr. Valentine, and others. And Mr. Holies,* 
notwithstanding the endeavour of Sir Thomas Edmondes, Sir Humphrey 
May,* and other Privy Councellors to free the Speaker from the Chair, 
swore, Gods wounds, he should sit still until they pleased to rise. 

Here Sir John Eliot began in a rhetorical oration to inveigh 
against the Lord Treasurer and the Bishop of Winchester, saying he covdd^ 
prove the Lord Treasurer to be a great instrument in the innovation of 
Religion, and innovation of the liberties of the House; and offered a 
Remonstrance to the House wherein he said, he could prove him to be 
the great enemy of the Commonwealth, saying that he had traced him in 
all his actions, and withal that if ever it were his fortune to meet again 
in this honourable assembly, he protested (as he was a gentleman) that 
where he now left, he would there begin again. 

The Remonstrance, being refused by the Speaker and the Clerk, was 
restored to his hands and by him read.^ 

The House then required the Speaker to put the business in hand to 
the question which he again denying and urging the Kings command 
was checked by Mr. Selden who told him^ he had ever loved his person 
well, but he could not choose but much blame him now that he being 
;the servant of the House should refuse their command under any 
colour^ whatsoever; and that this his obstinacy would grow a precedent 
to posterity if it should go unpunished. For that hereafter if we shall 
meet with a dishonest Speaker (as we cannot promise^" ourselves to the 
contrary) he might under pretense of the Kings command refuse to 

• discAorged ojjd, added. 'J'S; Tanner 72. 
« Valentine. X3. 

' Sir Humphrey May, only in Xi-8. 

* would, rii; Tanner 72. 

'In Xp.io; this paragraph has evidently been combined with the similar paragraph in the Eliot- 
Selden separate; but there are also additions. 

Then he offered the Remonstrance {before spoken of) to the House to be read. Which being put to the 
question, the Speaker refused to do it, saying he was otherwise commanded by the King. And being yet again 
pressed, he stiU denied to put it to the question or to read it. Which the Clerk also refused to do. Where- 
upon the Remonstrance was again redelivered to his hands and by him read. X9.10. 

And thereupon offered a Remonstrance, which being refused to be read both by the Speaker and Clerk 
was restored to him again, and by him read in these words following. 'J'1,12. 

* And being the third time urged to it and refusing, still insisting upon the Kings command, he was 
checked by Mr. Selden who told him. Xg.io. 

This was again offered to be put to question, but the Speaker said he was otherwise commanded by the 
King. Mr. Selden replied that. *i,i2. 

• pretense or colour. Xp.io. 
>« or assure, added. Xp.io. 



March 2 TRUE RELATION 105 

propose the business and intendment of the House; and therefore wished 
him to proceed. 

The Speaker with abundance of tears answered, I will not say, I 
will not, but I dare not; desiring that they would not command his ruin 
therein; that he had been their faithful servant, and would gladly sacrifice 
his life for the good of his coimtry; but he diu-st not sin against the express 
command of his Sovereign.^^ 

Yet notwithstanding the Speakers extremity of weeping and sup- 
plicatory oration quaintly eloquent,^^ Sir Peter Heyman (a gentleman 
of his own country) bitterly inveighed against him, and told him he was 
sorry he was a Kentish man, and that he was a disgrace to his country, 
and a blot to^^ a noble family, and that all the inconveniences that should 
foUow, yea, their destruction," should be derived to posterity as the issue 
of his baseness, by whom he should be remembered with scorn and dis- 
dain. And that he for his part (since he would^^ not be persuaded to do 
his duty) thought it fit he should be called to the Bar, and a new Speaker 
chosen in the meantime, since neither advice nor threats would prevail. 

Then they required Mr. Holies to read certain Articles^^ as the Prot- 
estations of the House, which were jointly, as they were read, allowed 
with a loud Yea by the House.^^ The effect of which Articles are as 
foUoweth, viz. [The Protestations follow. See above p. 101-2.] 

These being read and allowed of, the House rose up after they had 
sitten down two hours. 

The^8 King hearing that the House continued to sit (notwithstanding 
his command for the adjourning thereof) sent a messenger for the serjeant 
with the mace, which being taken from the table there can be no further 
proceeding; but the serjeant was by the House stayed, and the key of the 
door taken from him, and given to a gentleman of the House to keep.^^ 

" The Speaker made an humble supplicatory speech unto the House with extremity of weeping, showing 
what command he had received from his Majesty, and withal desiring them not to command his ruin. Xr. 
Thereupon the Speaker made a supplicatory oration quaintly eloquent wherein he sought the House not 
to command his ruin. X6. 

" Which he still refusing with extremity of weeping and supplicatory orations quaintly eloquent. *i,i2. 

" of. 'J'6,8,10; Tanner 72. 

>< distraction. X. 

" could. -^e.S.io. 

" or heads, added. Tanner 72. 

1' In this place: Mr. Slroude spake much to the same effect, and told the Speaker that he was the instru- 
ment to cut off the liberty of the subject by the root, and that if he would not be persuaded to put the same to 
question, they must all return as scattered sheep, and a scorn put upon them as it was last Session. Xr; that 
in text being given at the end of Feb. 23rd. 

IS And in the meantime the. 'J'1,12. 

i» but the key of the door was taken from the serjeant and delivered to Sir Miles Hubert to keep, who, after 
he had received the same, put the serjeant out of the House, leaving his mace behind him, and then locked the 
door. Xi. 

but the key of the door was taken from the serjeant and delivered to a gentleman of the House to keep, and 
the serjeant himself, being a very old man was, at his request, suffered to go only and stood luithout the door, 
but left his mace behind him. Xa-is. 



106 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 March 2 

, After this the King sent Maxwell (the screech-owl)^^ with the black 
rod for the dissolution of Parliament, but being informed that neither 
he nor his message would be received by the House, the King grew into 
much rage and passion, and sent for the Captain of the Pensioners and 
Guard to force the door, but the rising of the House prevented the blood- 
shed that might have been spilt. ^^ 

Notwithstanding the Parliament was but as yet adjourned until that 
day sevennight, being the tenth of March, yet were the principal gentle- 
men attached^^ by pursuivants, some the next morning; and on Wednesday 
by order from the Council-board sent to sundry prisons.^^ 

M usher. X. 

21 the blood-shed or other mischief that thereon might have ensued. Xg.io. 

the danger and ill consequence that might have followed. Xi. 

the inconveniences and mischiefs that therein might have ensued. X3,4,7; *i; Vii. 
^-arrested. I'lo. 

Independent Accounts of March 2nd and 3rd. 

"3 At which time the House met, and as soon as they were set the Speaker delivered unto them a message 
from his Majesty to adjourn the House until Tuesday sevennight after. Whereupon the Speaker would have 
rose presently. But the House locked the doors, continued till 12 of the clock, and {as some say) this Protesta- 
tion or proposition was agreed on by some in the House. [Then the Protestations follow.] 

Wednesday the third of March there came forth his Majesties proclamation for the dissolving of the 
Parliament, being proclaimed in the morning and in the afternoon. Nine of the members of the lower House 
were sent for before his Majesty and the Lords of the Privy Council at Whitehall, and were committed that 
evening, some to the Tower and some to other prisons. X14. 

And on Monday it was plainly apparent that it 7i!as so intended, yet at that time but adjourned again 
till the 10th of March. 

The House of Commons, perceiving his Majesties resolution to dissolve it, began to rise, but in the end 
Sir John Eliot and Mr. Selden expressed themselves. The House commanded the doors to be shut and kept 
until they should have drawn up and agreed upon a protestation which was pronounced by Mr. Holies. [Then 
the Prcjtestations follow.] The next morning divers gentlemen of the House were apprehended, and being 
brought before the Lords at the Council-table were thence committed to divers prisons. Xil. 




Part of a page from Nicholas's Notes 
Facsimile of rotograph of original manuscript 



( 



KEY TO NICHOLAS'S WORD SIGNS 



/ 


= they 


S =our 


y 


= God 


k =he 


Ay 


= all 


V = will 


\/7 


= unto 


Y\y =now 


/ 


= be 


/ = with 


L 


= that 


U, = within 


/ 


= the 


Vrv^ — without 


1 


= to 


/^ = than 


— 


= in 


j/^ =now 




= and 
= for 


1^ = which 
q^ = when 




= by 
= his 


/y =said 
c^Y — dehvered 


J 
/ 


= this 

= we 

= no, not 


<p/' = you 

^ = paid 
/^ = king's 


9 


= of 


2,^/-^= majesty's 


7 

r 


= if 
= there 


^= against 
^/ = right 





= had 


/ =1 period 





= hath 



THE NOTES OF SIR EDWARD NICHOLAS FOR THE 
SESSION OF THE COMMONS IN 1629 

[About the text of the Nicholas Notes only a few words need be said. So far as 
these notes are in longhand, they have been transcribed exactly. The spelling, 
punctuation, and even the capitalization, so far as we could be certain of the capitali- 
zation of the original, have been retained. Where, however, only part of a word was 
written out, the rest has been put in modern spelling. All word-signs and contrac- 
tions or abbreviations have been put in modern spelling. ] 

26° JAN. 1628 

Mr. Waller. That there is a licence procured to carry fishe come 
and other provisions for Spain: for which the Spanish gave 60000 
SterHng* in Spain: and that there may be stay made of the shipps 
that are laden with the same.^ There have bene likewise 500 peeces of 
Ordinance sent out of the kingdome since the last Sessions and there is a 
shipp now laden [blurred] with ordinance. Moved that a Comittee 
be appointed to examyne this busines and stay may be made of the shipps. 

Sir Dud [ley] Diggs. That in Kent the price of Come is under 
the rate that by the Statute it may be exported: if some course be not 
taken to take it of[f] from the farmers hands they will not be able to 
pay their rents: Moveth that a Comittee may take this into consid- 
eracion for he conceaveth the reason that come is not taken of[f] from 
the husbandmans hand is twill make the farmers breake: that therfore 
there may be some course be taken to give leave to men to expresse come 
when it is att^ the rates that it may be exported.'' 

Mr. R[ichard] Spencer. That there is a provision in the statute 
that when corne may be transported it is lawfull to expresse. 

Adrain Pace,** two brothers the Odwicks,^ Jo[hn] de la Bar,' Pet[er] Ri- 
card«are the parties that have licences to send over provisions to Kullery [ F].'' 

January 26. 

' under crossed out and att written above. 

» See Mason's report on the 29th (p. 115). 

•> Lowther (62) makes Waller give the reasons for the stay: "considering how advantageous it may 
be to our enemies and prejudicial to ourselves [i.e. that corn should be shipped], which being now raised 
from 20s to 30s, and the ports from which corn comes in time of dearth as Dantzic etc. are shut up." 

« In 2 r Jac. it had been made unlawful to transport grain out of the kingdom until its market price 
reached certain specified rates. Stat, of the Realm, vol. 4, pt. 2, p. 1237. 

d Adrian Paes or Pace (C.J. 1:922) is mentioned in Col. St. P. Dom. 1627-28, p. 222 as a Spanish 
merchant. For the fullest account of his activity see Alvise Contarini, Venetian Ambassador in England, 
to the Doge and Senate, Feb. 9. 1629 (n.d.) {Cal. St. P. Ven. 1628-29, p. 531) where he is called a Malago 
merchant. The editor of Lowther misread Adrian as "Alderman." 

e Oxwicker. C.J. 1:922. 

' See Cal. St. P. Dom. 1628-20. pp. 185, 301. 

« Peter Rickard. C.J. 1:922. 

b Cellera. 



108 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 26 

The Comittee is to consider of this busines and all incidents thereof 
too morrow afternoon in Exchequer Chamber with power to send for 
parties.* 

The Concell to move the King presently for stay of these shipps 
licenced to goe not stay.' 

Mr. Sec[retary] Coke delivers in the Bill of tonnage and pound- 
age; recomends it to us in his Majesties name and desires that his 
Majestic and the World may see our affecion by the speady passage of it> 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. Noe man [the] King knowes makes doubt of 
his Majesties piety and goodnes: and our loyalty is the same to his 
Majestic and noe weight moves more naturally to its center: he doth 
not thinke the passing of the Bill of Subsidie can give his Majestic meanes 
to stopp the course of the house of Austria or to preserve the Sound. 
This Bill had passed the last Sessions if his Majestic had pleased to give 
tyme for it: he thinketh it should be counted an Ordinary meanes, but 
was wont to be counted an extraordinary meanes and was only for guard 
of the Narrow Seas. This Bill doth give power to lay imposicions att 
pleasiire: he would have us make a representacion to his Majestie of our 
right in this busines and our sense before wee passe the Bill.^ 

Sir Rob[ert] Hartley, would have this Bill read because the King 
hath sent for it. 

Mr. Selden. That this Bill is a Subsidy Bill and it is against our 
liberties to have a Bill of Subsidy to come into this house by the Kings 
recomendacion, and therfore though he shall with all respect reverence 
whatsoever comes from his Majestie he would not have this Bill now 
read, for it hath bene against the course of parliament to beginne with 
a Bill of Subsidy. "^ 

Sir D[udley] Digs. That he doth not know why a Bill of Subsidy 
may not move from his Majestie; but because this Bill will aske tyme 

'The parties named above were to attend the committee. C.J. 1:922. 
»C/. C.J. 1:922. 

k "Secretary Coke: This business hath been well settled. We know his Majesty hath come a great 
pace unto us, it is necessary that we go with some paces unto him, to which end I present this bill, which 
I desire we may give a reading unto it which may give a good satisfaction to other Kingdoms how willing 
we are to supply and defend him and the kingdom. We know how potent the kings of Spain and France 
are, there is one danger more added, which is the loss of every sound; nay, the House of Austria hath 
made themselves masters of all the principal ports of the Baltic sea, and there is now a fleet of so ships 
provided with men and ordnance, for what service it is to be feared. Our gracious King is preparing a 
fleet, which if this be forward it will much advance the service of the King and the Kingdom." Lowther 62 . 
' "Sir John Elliot: I do not stand up to retard this business but rather to forward it, which will not 
be by a present reading but rather by a preparation of other things to give this a freer passage to it, which 
might otherwise receive some stand. And whereas it is said that this is one of the ordinary means for 
enabUng the King, it is not so, for Fortescue the learned justice says that it was one of the extraordinary 
means." Lowther 62. 

■» "Mr. Selden: I think it is against the fundamental liberty of the House to have it read, for since 
it is truly a bill of subsidy, whether it be fit to be so offered to be read before it hath received any debate 
in the House, which is not usual to prefer any such bill before debate." Lowther 62. 



January 26 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 109 

att a Comittee, moveth that a Comittee may be appointed to consider 
this afternoone of a fitt Bill of Tonage and Poundage to be offered to 
this house.'' 

Sir Ro[bert] Philipps would not give way to the reading of this 
Bill till the house were satisfyed for the breach of the liberties of this 
house: for what is refered to a Comittee to examyne concerning the 
abuses and cariage- of Carmarthen" to the prejudice of the lib[er]ties 
of this house. And that being done then to proceede with the Bill. 

Pelham, would have us first establishe our right in this, before we 
give it by reading or passing this Bill. 

This busines is left without question with an inclynacion that we 
shall speedily fall into consideracion of the heads and points of a Bill 
of Tonage and poundage. p 

Mr. Rouse. That it may [be] considered how the Sea of Rome doth 
breake in uppon our Bankes and what new payntinges have bene put 
uppon that whore to make her more lovely. An Arminian will take a 
papist by the hand, he a Jesuit, he the pope and King of Spain. When 
Job would not curse God he had his goods againe. We have bene more 
prosperous when we have stooke to our God. Would have us make a 
vow to keepe our God and he will prosper us and let every one say Amen.<» 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymour. The number of papists still increase, 
about this Towne: and they goe boldly to and from the Masse. His 
Majesties name is abused to stay proceedinges against papists contrary 
to his Majesties promises, and the Kings proclamacion and after co- 
mands given to the Judges who are tyed by oath to execute the lawes. 
Uppon a little examinacion it will be easily found out who is the cause 
of all this.' 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillips. That the present state of religion may be 
considered of by the Comittee. On point of humiliation, that we might 

- and herring, crossed out. 

" "Sir Dudley Digges: It is impossible that this bill should in all things square with the bill of subsidy, 
for that we see the wisdom of our ancestors to grant it in former [times] for life; and for that principal 
objection, that it is against the fundamental liberty. I have known that such bills, nay the bill of 
subsidy, hath.been brought in by the King's council." Lowther 62. 

o Carmarthen was one of the customers. 

p Such an inclination cannot be discovered from the other accounts. See Nethersole (p. 246). 

<] For the fullest report of this speech, probably from Rouse's own manuscript, see True Relation 
(p. 12). 

' "Sir Francis Seymour: I know that what is done in the country is undone in the city touching 
religion, and the King's name used in it, which is a great scandal to the King's profession and his answer 
to our petition of religion. And if you will know who is the man that doth this you may; if you do but 
consider this point you will easily know, nay I think every man that sitteth here doth know it. Herein 
I have cleared my conscience." Lowther 63. But see also True Relation (p. 14), for though no one 
account gives this speech in full a fairly complete statement of it can be made by comparing the three 
versions. 

In the True Relation, Seymour's speech is followed with one by Kirton. Lowther gives an abbre- 
viated version of the same speech which he assigns to Coryton. 



no COMMONS DEBATES FOR 162Q January 27 

have a fast soe to divert Gods wrath, to bring God into our Counselles 
before our Armies." 

Secre[tary] Coke. He is confident wee shall find his Majestie 
very much inclined to settle and quiett the differences in Religion and 
to establishe it in the same state it was when he came to the crowne. 
Would have us not to meddle with other points of Religion then what 
concemes matter of facte, for the rest it belonges to another place.* 

Mr. Sherland. That some who are enemyes to our Religion doe 
call us puritans and putting the King on businesses contrary to the funda- 
mentall liberties of the subject such as they know a parliament will 
not yeeld imto, then they insinuate to the King that those that oppose 
the Arminians oppose his Majesties businesses and soe involve their 
owne furious disposicions and endes with the Kings right businesses." 

Resolved that all the particulars concerning the groweth of popery 
or Arminianisme and other incidents concerning the same shalbe this 
aftemoone taken into consideracion by the Comittee of Religion, and 
the Comittee to have power to send for parties. 

Resolved that this house shall by pet[ition] desire a fast, and a 
Comittee appointed for this purpose to draw this peticion to meete this 
aftemoone in courts of wardes. 

27° JAN. 1628 

Ordered that Rob[er]te Lewis, Spanishe merchant of London, shalbe 
sent for, to answeare his contempt to the parliament in cursing the par- 
liament saying a plague take the parliament he cared not for it." 

There was a Bill this day presented to the house by Mr. Jordan 
intituled an Act for printing the Marginall Notes in the Bible: which 
the house did wishe might be laid a side till another tyme, implying that 
it was not fitt to have it read att all. 

Resolved that a conference shalbe desired with the Lordes that att 
that conference the pet[ition] now drawne to his Majestie for a g[ene]rall 
fast shalbe then presented to the Lordes.^ 

• For the fullest report of this speech see True Relation (p. 16). 

' "Secretary Coke: I have been bold to give sometimes cautions that we should not do anything 
in religion except that which concerns matter in fact, for other things we know belongs to another place, 
and not proper for us to be disputed." Lowther 63. 

» "Shirland: Though the greatest part of the kingdom be sound, but there be divers particular 
persons who have the ears of majesty to subvert the settled government; for they put the King on things 
not lawful, and they weaken him by opposition and make their quarrel the king's, and so set difference 
betwixt the King and the people, and so to work their own ends." Lowther 63. For the fullest account 
see True Relation (p. 15-16). 

January 27. 

• For additional information see C.J. 1:922; True Relation (p. 16-17). 

«> This petition was presented to the House by Sir Nathaniel Rich. True Relation (p. 17) gives it 
in full. 



January 27 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 111 

Mr. Pym. That att the comittee for Religion it was desired to 
see the Remonstrance given the last parliament to the King: that it might 
be seene what was sett downe therein for that point concerning Religion, 
and the Clerck said that by the Kings comand he carried it to the Courts 
and his Majestic gave it to the now Lo[rd] Pr[ivy] Scale, whereon the 
Comittee thought it not fitt to proceede any further till the house were 
acquainted therewith. <= 

Mr. Sec[retary] Coke. That the King hath now sent the Remon- 
strance, and assures himself that wee will proceede on those groimds; 
his Majestic alsoe expects we should give precedency to the Bill of Ton- 
nage etc. before any other busines to take away the differences betweene 
some subjects of his Majestic least the joye his Majestic perceaved in 
the faces of all men att his last speech should have -all thic[k]t over.** 

Mr. Waller had rather follow the direcions of a poore traveller 
in an unknowne way then of a expert Geographer and of a poor preching 
Minister that walketh in the way of God then of a Bishopp that never 
set foote in the way of God.* 

Mr. Pym. Our Religion hath bene established from tyme to tyme 
with much care by the Kings of this Realme. To have the proclamacion 
cleared which seemes doubtfull whether it may be lawfuU to preach 
against Arminianisme which contradicts our Religion soe well estab- 
lished. To inquire what men who have publiquely held and professed 
Arminianisme have bene preferred, by whose meanes. Whether and by 
whome those points have bene preched before the King since it was 
declared it should not be preched. What bookes in favor of Arminian- 
isme have bene licensed and other good bookes against it suppressed and 
by whome. The Convocacion house is but a provinciall Synode: the 
Highe Comission Courte is derived from parliament and noe derivative 
can prejudice or exclude a primative. What pardons have bene granted 
to men that have held and written for Arminianisme, by the name of 
preaching or holding false doctrine.^ 

Heads principally to be considered of by the Comittee of Religion 
presently, 

1. popery: the cessacion of execucion of lawes against papists and all 
incidents thereto. 

" Nethersole (p. 246-47) gives an account of what happened in the Committee of Religion on the after- 
noon of January 26. The others give only Pym's report of that meeting; but all agree on the facts. The 
Remonstrance was called for, the clerk answered that it had been delivered to the Lord Privy Seal, and 
in consequence the committee proceeded no further. 

d Cf. Nethersole's Letters (p. 247). 

• "I had rather ask the way to any strange place of a plain country carrier who travels that way daily 
than of any cunning geographer who only discourseth of it, and setteth not a foot that way. And I would 
have these foxes, these little foxes who cunningly seek to divert the King, and are so dangerous: therefore 
let us look them out." Lowther 64. True Relation does not give this speech by Waller, but in this 
place one by Cory ton. 

' True Relation gives Pym's speech at greater length. 



112 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 28 

2. Contenancing of papists and popishe parties: and all incident thereto. 

3. bringing in of popishe ceremonies: which are insisted in B[isho]prick 
of Duresme. 

Arminianisme. 

1. That the way may be opened for a free passage of the truth of our 
Religion soe long professed here. 

2. The stopps and discouragements of those of our Religion, as pardons, 
preferments of those that professe Arminianisme and all incident, 
licencing of Bookes, and preching of those points before the King. 

3. The way and proceedings of former parliaments in punishing of such 
faults and offences: when to consider that the Convocacion house is 
a provinciale Sinode, the highe Comission Court is but a derivative of 
parliament, e 

Libertie given to the Comittee to take into consideracion those 
heads and all things else concerning Religion. 

Resolved that the Comittee of Religion shall have precedency before 
all other Comittees.^ 

The Comittee appointed to consider and examyne whether the pet[ition] 
of right were enrolled in the Courts of Justice are to meete this aftemoone. 

The Comittee for Religion shall meete too morrow morning att 8 
a clock. 

28 JANUAR. 1628 

Pet[ition] of Mr. Chambers* complayning of his imprisonment by 
the Lords of the Councell: that his goods were taken by the officers of 
the Customes and are kept from him albeit he offereth security to pay 
whatsoever shalbe lawfully due to his Majestic out of the same and 
praycth the restitution of his goods. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott, He findeth the Judges, the Councell, Sheriffs 
Customers, the Attor[ney], and all conspire to trample on the spoiles of 
the libertie of the sub[jec]ts. Would have the parties whose goods are 
thus kept from him to take a legall course for release of his goodes that we 
may see what Ministers will refuse to doe their duty therein. 

Mr. Sec[retary] Coke, Desire that such words that all the officers 
of state doe trample on the libertie of the Sub[jec]t may be forborne.'' 

Mr. Sec[retary] Coke, Message from the King. That the King did 
recomend imto this house by his gracious declaracion concerning Tonnage 

eC/. C 1.1:922-23. 

•> C.J. (1:922) places this resolution before Pym's report; Nethersole (p. 247) puts it even earlier, 
before Secretary Coke's message from the King. 

January 28. 

» For further information about Chambers see Col. St. P. Dom. 1628-1629, pp. 362, 529, 539. 
•> These proceedings are given nowhere else. In this connection see the information against Eliot at 
his trial. Stale Trials, 3:321. 



January 28 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 113 

and poundage the speedy passage of that Bill : and doth expect we should 
give precedency to that Bill of Tonnage and poundage. As for the 
busines of Religion soe as we handle it with moderacion and medle not 
with what belonges to his Majestie, and shalbe reddy to receave any notice 
therein from us of anything whereof consideracion hath not beene alreddy 
taken. ° 

Mr. Tr[easure]r is sorry this house has given his Majestie occasion 
soe often to reiterate his desires for passing the Bill of Tonnage especially 
since his Majestie has dealt so graciously with us. Desireth us to take 
heede that by our neglect of reading of that Bill we doe not give his 
Majestie cause to repent of the good he hath [done] for us in his fathers 
tyme*^ and since by himself in granting the petition] of Right. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott, Would have the King acquainted that such 
Messages as we received from his Majestie have hindered his owne 
businesses.^ 

Mr. Fr[ancis] Seymour, Would have a Comittee appointed to con- 
sider of an answere to his Majestie that we may not seeme to neglect 
wholly his Majesties Messages. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Ritch, That the heads of such answere as we 
shall give to his Majestie [here there is a blank space of about three lines].^ 

28 JAN. 1628 

Mr. Kirton, Would have it set downe in this answere to his Maj- 
estie that albeit he did say he declared not to take or clayme tonnage and 
poundage as his right, yet his Ministers have soe taken it, and till that bee 
setled we cannot proceede to reade. 

Heads for our answere to the Kings Message. 

Expression of our dutifull affecion and resolucion to satisfye his Maj- 
estie and that the best way is to begin with the matter of ReHgion. 

• Nethersole (p. 247) calls attention to the fact that because of this message the Committee for ReHgion 
did not meet as had been intended. See also C.J. 1:924. 

<• In the session of 1628 (April 2) Sir Edward Coke in discussing supplies said of Charles: "Hee 
was an excellent instrument for us in Parliament in his father's time and obtayned for us a limitation of 
Null urn tempus occuril regi, and many other good laws" (Borlase MS Stowe, 366, f. 38, verso). Other 
accounts give the same speech but worded a little differently. "Thus King James, his father's tyme [he] 
was an excellent meanes to procure all theis excellent lawes we had whereby to prevent all those wormes 
the locust and the caterpillar, the informer, the monopoHzer and concealer" (Mass. MS, f. 61). "That 
we have given this greatest King, who was a means to his father to procure us many good lawes — the 
informers, concealers, dispensing with penal statutes and monopolyes taken away" (Harl. 2313, f. 25). 
King James testified to the activity of his son on behalf of parliament in a speech before the Lords on 
March 26, 1621: "I have just cause to fear the whole body of this House hath bribed him to be a good 
instrument for you upon all occasions; he doth so good offices in all his reports to me both for the House 
in general, and every one of you in particular" (L.J. 3:69). See also Commons Debates in 1625 (Cam. 
Soe, 1873) 3, 9-10 and Eliot's Negotium Posterorum I: 48, 66-67. 

e "This often iteration of messages doth hinder us more than anything." Lowther, 65. 
' See True Relation (p. 22-23) for speeches in this debate by Long, Edmundes, and Coryton; for the 
order concerning the answer to the King's message. See also Nethersole for a more general summary. 



114 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 28 

That wee may give his Majestie thanks for Religion and alsoe a 
Remonstrance for that we conceave there are now greate plots to under- 
mine our religion.^ 

That the matter of Tonnage etc. if we had not bene moved in it we 
should have taken occasion to have brought in and read a Bill for that 
busines. 

4. That in the matter of Religion we intend not in the Novell points of 
Religion to dispute of them, but will take a course to suppresse 
Novell opinions as former parliaments have done; but this to bee left 
without direcione to the consideracion of the Comittee. 

5. That it may alsoe be considered of whether it may not be fitt to in- 
timate to his Majestie that we conceave those who put his Majestie to 
presse for reading of the Bill of Tonnage have noe care of Religion or 
his Majesties service. 

6. That all our disputes shall tend to the honor and safety of his Maj- 
estic.^ 

The Comittee for this piirpose to meete presently in the Treas[ury] 
Chamber in Exchequer. 

An Act for explanacion of a Branch of a Statute made in 3° Jac. intitled 
an Act for the better discovering and repressing of popishe Recusents. 
2° Lectio. 

Sir Miles Fleetwood, moveth that Mr. Richardson may bring in 
such leases as were moved by him to the Comittee to be considered, for 
there are some whose estates are 1500£ per annum have compounded 
for 30£ or 40£ per annum, that thereby we may shew the King how 
much his Grace and Mercy is abused and how farre extended. 
'i..«l Sir Tho[mas] Hobby would have all leases brought in or a note of 
them that have bene made contrary to the lawe : for that they are all voyde. 

Sir Tho[mas] Hobby to take care of this Bill. 

Ordered that Jo[hn] Cornewell^ who served Sir Giles Bridges Baronet 
a member of this house with processe att the suyte of the Lord Wimble- 
don shalbe sent for, for that he served it since the house sate. 

1 that we were by an order to go on first with the business of Religion is crossed out. 

e A comparison of the heads in Nicholas with those in the Commons Journal (p. g23) brings out some 
important differences. Nicholas omits the first heading as given in the Journal and in its place inserts 
a statement designed to mollify the King. Nicholas's second head agrees with that in the Journal save 
that a "remonstrance" is added. His third head is much more aggressive. The fourth in the Journal 
includes both the fourth and sixth in Nicholas. Nicholas's vigorous statement under his fifth is omitted 
entirely from the Journal. The final draft of the Apology (True Relation p. 29-30) contains points not in 
the Commons Journal heads, showing either that the select committee acted upon its own responsibility 
or (what is much more probable) that the Journal gives a very incomplete statement of the conclusions 
arrived at after a very heated debate in the House. Not only does the Apology contain Nicholas's fifth 
head but the positive assertion found in none of the heads that religion should have precedence over 
tonnage and poundage. 

h Cornill, C.J. 1:923. 



January 29 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 115 

Peticion of Jo[hn] Michell esq. against the Bishopp of Lincolne: 
The peticion [er] was called in and att the barr rebuked for his uncivill 
and unfitt language in it as saying that act of mallice etc' 

Pet[ition] of the Levant Company for release of their goods staid by 
the officers of the Custome house, referred to the Comittee for that 
purpose. 

29° JANUAR. 1628 

An Act for better allowance for mayntenance of preaching Ministers 
and for more ordinary Catechising. 1* Lectio. 

Ordered that concerning deposicions in the cause of Sir Henry Baggett, 
a member of this house, and Sir Ed [ward] Littleton by Com[ission] out of 
the Chancery who by reason of his attendance in this house could not nor 
was att the examinacion of the said Com[ission] albeit it were a joint 
Com[ission]. Mr. Speaker shall wryte to that Court for suppressing of 
the said Deposicions. 

Ordered that Sir Jo[hn] Hippisley being peticioned against in the 
upper house shall not uppon payne of expulsion out of this house answere 
to the said peticion.* 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymour moveth that those who complained in the 
upper house against Sir Jo[hn] Hippisley should be sent for and pimished 
for so doing. 

Mr. Speaker is to call on Sir Jo[hn] Hippisley when he comes to name 
the parties that peticioned against him. 

Mr. Mason reporteth from the Comittee that one Adrian Pace hath 
lived in MalHga about 10 yeares; he hath a licence from Spaine to buy 
prohibited goods to be sent thither, he gave in Spain 60000 ducates^ 
for the said licence: Roberte Oxwick had a licence from his Majestic 
hath power to transport into any porte diverse manufactures, and by 
a second licence he had power to carry pipe staves, lead, corne: this 
second licence was procured by the E[arl] of Holland, and delivered by 
Sir Fr[ancis] Cottington who tould him althoughe he had power to trans- 
port such prohibited goods yet he should not doe it. The 3 shipps are 
att Dartmouth, and of the severall biurthens of 300 tons 240 and 180 tons 
that the said Oxwick hath shipt pipe staves and the said 3 shipps are 
bound for Spaine. 

» Michell was likewise rebuked because his petition was too general, containing no particular charges. 
C.J. 1:923. 

January 29. 

•C/. C.J. 1:924. 

*> "60,000 Ducats; is,ooo£ Sterling" (C.J. 1:924); "100,000 ducats" (Lowther 65). 



116 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 January 29 

The Comittee hath not gonne throughe [blurred] with examinacion of 
this busines but referres it to the consider acion of this house whether it 
be not fitt to stay the said 3 shipps.'' 

Ordered that Archibald Nicholls a Scotsman who complayneth against 

Sir Jo[hn] Hippisley in the upper house shalbe sent to answeare his offence 

in complayning there against a Member of this house too morrow morning. 

Comittee of Religion this 29. Jan. 1628. in the morning*^ Mr. 

Pym in the Chayre. 

Sir Ben[jamin] Rider." His Majestic hath alreddy publiquely 
declared to keepe the unity of love in the bond of peace; popery is antient 
amongst us and in that we complayne only of the want of execucion of 
lawes against Recusants. 

Arminianisme lately crept in and crept upp into highe places. Moveth 
that we should consider of the Articles of our faith long since agreed, 1552, 
and published againe lately; the antient catechisme appointed and pub- 
lished in our booke of comon prayer, and to consider alsoe of those alsoe 
att Lambeth: from all which he would have us to take our proceedings, to 
expresse what those were, and to advance against all that shall vary from 
those, without disputing for or against particulars nor upstart opinions. 

Sir Rob[ert] Harley. That the bookes written by Dr. Montague 
Bishopp of Chichester, Dr. Jackson, Dr. Cosins, Dr. Duncombe have 
bene great causers of the increase of Arminianisme. Remedies, would 
have us 1, make in this house a publique declaracion of our Religion 
here. 21y to desire the lords to joyne with us in a Remonstrance to the 
King that he would be pleased to cause these persons forenamed to be 
punished, and their bookes to be publiquely burnt. ^ 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. Hath a feare of the declaracion lately made in 
his Majesties name, yet without any jelousy of his Majestic, as in Plutarch 
Antiochus wrote that whatsoever letters were written by him or in his 

' "Sir Francis Cottington shows how that it is true that such a license was also granted by the King 
of England for carrying out of manufactures, which hath been and will be to his advantage ioo,ooo£., 
which how much it will advance the King in these times of necessity I leave it to this House to consider." 
Lowther 65-66. See also C.J. 1:924; True Relation (p. 23). 

<• True Relation (p. 23) says the Committee for Religion sat in the afternoon. 

• i.e. evidently Sir Benjamin Rudyard. Lowther 66. 

' Lowther gives a long speech for Harley — whom he miscalls Harlow. "I shall be glad to divide the 
matter into: — 

"i. What our religion is: the Articles made in 1562 in Queen Elizabeth's time, the Articles made 
at Lambeth, the Articles in Ireland; King James also by his wisdom and pen in the synod of Dort being 
solely guided by our example. 

"2. The danger of our religion is the bringing in of popery and Arminianism; first, by a book written 
by Mr. Richard Montague, then by one of Doctor Jackson, another by Doctor Cosens, chaplain to the 
Right Reverend Father the Bishop of Winchester. 

"The remedies which I shall present are two: first, that we make an unanimous profession of our 
religion; secondly, that we desire a conference with the Lords to join with us in a remonstrance to represent 
these persons to the King, that they may have condign punishment. The motives are that the people 
are drawn for the King's subjection." 



January 29 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 117 

name contrary to lawe it was none of his but besides his intent. Another 
f eare from the convocacion house : King Edward 6 did expresse in a dyary 
written with his owne hand that some Bishopps for sloth, some for 
ignorance, some for popery were unfitt to be Bishopps. « There are 
amongst our Bishopps some very worthy and orthodoxe men for whome 
posterity will he beleaves blesse our age and tyme, but that all our 
Bishopps are not soe wittnes the 2 Bishopps named the last parliament 
in the Remonstrance, and Mr. Montague he will not call him Bishopp. 
Moveth that we should agree uppon a method and order for our pro- 
ceedings.^ 

Mr. Sherland. Would have us declare that our Religion and faith 
is conteyned within the 39 Articles according to the opinions and interpre- 
tations which have bene published, preached written and taught by our 
devines from the first tyme of the publishing of them till within these 
7 or 8 yeares.^ ' 

Resolved that Mr. Spencer or any other that have scene or can 
produce the Act of State (which it is conceaved is false) whereby the 
Articles of Lambeth were suppressed and the Recantacion that was made 
by [blank] that wrote or spoke against those Articles. 

Mr. Selden saith 

The 39 Articles of ovir faith were agreed on by the Convocacion house 
A° 1562, and after confirmed by Act of parliament ^4° 1571. That the 
Reformacion of our Religion was not perfect nor setled till 13° Eliza. 

Resolved on question by this Comittee that we shall make a declara- 
tion; That we the Comons in parliament assembled doe clayme prof esse 

1 Following this has been crossed out an interesting draft of the declaration evidently written while 
the debate was in progress, as the many corrections testify. In every case the stronger position was 
abandoned and a weaker one adopted. 

K See J. G. Nichols, Literary Remains of King Edward VI, 2:478 (Roxburghe Club, London, 1857). 
Nichols quotes from a Discourse on the Proclamation of Abuses to be found among the Cottonian MSS. 
In that manuscript Edward says: "For discipline it were very good that it went forth and that those 
that did notablye offend in swearing, rioting, neglecting of God's word, or such like vices were direly 
punished, so that thos that should be the executors of this discipline were men of tried honesty, wisdom 
and judgment. But because thos bishops whoe should execute, some for Papistrye, some for ignorance, 
some for age, some for their ill name, some for all theis ar[e] men unable to execute discipline, it is there- 
fore a thing unmeete for these men." 

t True Relation has a fuller account of this speech, but much the fullest is that given in Forster's 
5/)- John Eliot, 2:210-14. 

• In Lowther, Eliot is followed by Rich and Spencer. "Sir Nathaniel Rich: It is an easy thing to 
see the difference betwixt two opinions, but difficult to know the reasons of the diversity, for the matter 
of the difference we may take it into consideration, but not the latter. 

"We do claim, profess and avow for truth the sense of the Articles framed 1562, which were confirmed 
by Act of parliament, 13 Eliz., 1571, which by the public acts of the Church of England and by general 
and current exposition of the writers; and we do reject the sense of the Jesuits and Arminians and all 
others wherein they do differ from us. 

"Mr. Spencer questioned, for that he said that the Articles of Lambeth were recalled or suppressed 
by an act of state; and the same questioned by the Queen that the Bishop might incur a premunire; but 
this with much ado was quieted and proceeded no farther." Spencer's remarks explain what follows 
in Nicholas. 



118 COMMONS DEBATES FOR i62g January 29 

and avowe for truth that sense of the 39 Articles of Religion which were 
established in parliament An° 1571 being in the 13 Eliz. which by the 
publique acts of the Church of England and the generall and current 
exposicions of the writers of our Church hath bene delivered unto us: 
And that we doe reject the sense of the Jesuites, Arminians and all others 
wherein they differ from it. 

To be reported^ presently to the house. 
Mr. Speaker in the Chaire. 

Resolved by question in the house that this declaracion agreed' by 
the Comittee of Religion shalbe made by us. 

Mr. Tr[easure]r. That the King will forthwith take consideracion of 
staying the shipps for Spaine, and send us answeare.' 

' too morrow morning all S a clock, crossed out. 

» made, crossed, out. 

i At the close of the 29th Lowther gives: "An answer to the King that we cannot yet entertain the 
reading of the bill of tonnage and poundage." For this see also C.J. 1:924. 

For Proceedings in the House on January 30th Lowther gives the only account aside from that in 
the Journal. 

"A petition of John Predian, gentleman, against Henry Alein having preferred a scandalous 
petition to the King, together with 13 articles containing the most of the Arminian opinions, and accusing 
the Bishop of Lincoln. 

"i. Puritan faction to agree in tertiis with the Jesuits. 

"That he defends the rigid opinions of predestination. 

"That he calleth the petitions of parliament, the petition of puritans. 

"That he defendeth the opinions of Doctor Mannering, and all the Arminian opinions. 

"That those sectaries and maligners do especially oppose royal prerogative. 

"That Justice is no measure betwixt the King and his people. 

"That he averreth that the writing of his book to be a service to his Majesty, which is Doctor Manner- 
ing's opinions. 

"That the Bishop of Lincoln charged the King with mutability, for giving two diverse answers to 
the puritans at Oxford. 

"The House. 

"The petition of William Jones against the Bishop of Winchester. Whereas divers opinions maintained 
by Mr. Montague against the tenets of our church, upon proclamation for the confirming of him Bishop 
of Winchester if any would prefer any Articles against him to show why he should not be confirmed, the 
said William Jones preferred divers Articles against him for the writing of divers books against the religion 
professed, yet notwithstanding he was confirmed; which illegal confirmation and his new broached 
opinions he desire you will be pleased to take into your pious consideration, and so to do as you shall 
think fit. 

"Sir Henry Martin: The form of election of bishops is after a conge d'elire which is license to the 
Dean and chapter to choose, yet they must choose who the King shall name, and who shall speak against 
this election or confirmation shall incur a prcemitnire. And it is likewise true that proclamation is made 
if any will speak against his election he may, but yet he shall not; when they go to cho,ose the bishop they 
pray that the Holy Ghost should direct them, yet shall choose such a one as is named. And I wish this 
ceremony might be left, for the form is as if they were free, but yet they are bound. 

"Selden: The form of choosing of bishops being altered by the statute of 25 Hen. VIII, cap. 20, 
by which first letters missive by the King were sent to the Dean and Chapter to signify who he will have 
chosen, and then a congi d'elire to choose such a one, and then for the Archbishop to confirm him. But 
he taketh the meaning of this Act not to exclude exceptions which are legal, but make that a prcemunire, 
when refusal is made without such due exception. 

"Doctor Eaton saith that before this statute the King did nominate as now, as this statute was prop- 
erly made for confirmation. 

"But he saith that the reason as he hath heard for which the articles were not accepted of against 
him was, because there was no advocate's hand unto them, therefore they were illegal. 

"Ordered that this dispute shall be referred to another time, for to be argued by both lawyers of the 
House. 



January 31 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 119 

31 "' JANUAR. 1628 

Att the Comittee of Religion Mr. Pym in the Chaire. 

Resolved that the busines of Arminians shalbe first debated. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich saith the publique Acts of the Church of 
interpretacion are the Catechismes ; Articles of Lambeth;* and for 
Barretts preaching against the Articles of Lambeth, he was forced to 
recant which recantacion is alsoe in print with authority:^ the articles of 
Ireland :•= the conclusiones of the Sinode of Dort,^ the same being first 
allowed here by King James as the Opinions of the churches of England 
and Scotland: the Readings of the publique professors of our Univer- 
[si]ties. And all those bookes of our antient devines printed by authority 
of the Homilies of our Church. « 

Mr. Selden: Shal assent that oux Catechismes is a publique Act of 
the Church ; and the booke of Homilies, the book of Ordinacion of Minis- 
ters, the booke of Comon Prayer; the articles were agreed imto in the 
Convocacion house A° 1571: which was alsoe a publique act of the Church. 
Antiently there were Clergy men that did sitt and assent to all that the 
Convocacion house did doe albeit they did not sitt in the Convocacion 
house and therefore there was a parliament that [had] power and did 
agree of eccl[esiasti]call power. ^ Would not have us take the Articles of 

"Mr. Speaker in the Chair. 

"The petition read which Predian preferred to the King and the articles which were preferred against 
the Bishop of Lincoln. 

"He is called in and examined touching the petition, and the articles which he confeseth, and that 
it was his own handwriting, but denieth any encouragement that he had from any, and also that he 
intended puritans to be only Nonconformist." 

Under this date True Relation gives the presentation of the Petition for the Fast to the King and 
his answer. That is the only place that the answer is given. 

JA^fUARY 31. 

» For these Articles see Prynnc, Anli-Arminianism (Second Edition 1630), 12-14. Lowther (68-6p> 
quotes them at length from this book. 

b For Barret's retraction in the original Latin see Strype, Life oj Whilgift (3 vol., Oxford, 1822) 3:3:7- 
20; for a translation into English see Prynne, Anti-Arminianism (Second Edition 1630), pp. 56-62. "be 
retraction was made before the Heads of the University of Cambridge, not before Archbishop Whi'gift 
who informed the Heads that they were without authority and should have submitted the whole rratter 
to him {Life 2:239-41). Moreover he considered that they had made Barret aflSrm things coitrary 
to the doctrine of the Church of England. To Whitgift the fault in Barret lay not in the views le held 
but in that he had started a controversy in the Church. 

• For the Articles of Ireland see Prynne, Anti-Arminianism, 17-21. 

^ For an English translation of the 18 Articles of the Synod of Dort put forth in 1619 see P.ev. Thos. 
Scott's, The Articles of the Synod of Dort (Philadelphia 1856), 182-90. 

• "Sir Nathaniel Rich; The better to find out those of that sect, we must know wha^ the public 
acts of the Church are, and then we shall know those that dissent from them. And for thefirst I think 
these to be public acts of the Church. 

" 1st. Catechisms made and confirmed by Act of Parliament. Selden accord. 

"and. The Articles of 13 Eliz., and the Common Prayer book are public Acts of the Ciurch. 

"3rd. The Articles of Lambeth." Lowther 68. 

• In earlier times as a rule, different persons were chosen as representatives for parlianent and con- 
vocation (Makower, The Constitutional History and Constitutions of the Church of England, London, 1895, 
20S n.). It is evidently to this fact that Selden refers. As nearly as can be made out fromthe very incom- 
plete statement by Nicholas, Selden's argument was that in the earlier period there wa;a parliament of 
three estates which was superior to the convocation even in ecclesiastical matters. 



120 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 3 

Lambeth to be wrated by us as a publique act, for that they were printed: 
nor the Articles of Ireland or Scot [land] would they have to be said as 
publique Acts of the Church of England: nor yet the proceedinges of 
the Synode at Dort, because there was noe authority given that Sinode by 
any publique authority of England albeit our men were sent over by 
pub[lique] authority; for there were other devines as of the Pallitinate 
etc. nor the Readinges of our professors in Universities nor bookes printed 
by authority, but noe publique authority gives force to either of those.* 

Mr. Littleton. The Convocacion house hath noe power to make 
any Cannon of the Church or to put it uppon the State but by the assent 
of the State, what the Convocacion house hath made for a Cannon hath 
bene rejected by the parliament. 

Serjeant Hoskins. That by the Church is to be imderstood all the 
beleevers of the Chtu-ch, and the Convocacion house is not to be termed 
the chtirch nor hath power to doe a publique act; for that only is said to 
be a publique act which is considered of, debated, disputed and resolved 
on by the King and all the State. 

The papists and we agree all in the Scripture and differ only in the inter- 
pretacion, and for that wee offer to be tryed by the 3 generall Creedes, the 4 first 
generall Councells, and all the antient fathers that wrote in the first 400 yeares. 

This Comittee doth adjourne itself till Tuesday 8 a clock. 
Mr. Speaker in Chaire. 

Mr. Sec[retary] Coke. That the King doth appoint to receive our 
answere to his Majestic.^ 

3° FEBRUARY 1628 

An Act for naturalizing the lady Strange which received from the 
Lords twice read.* 

An Act for increase of trade: /. lectio. This Bill is for passing of Bills 
of debt from one merchant to another.^ 

e'^^owther quotes Selden as follows: "Selden said that that could not be a public act of the Church, 
for thdt cannot be a public act which is not done by a public authority, for such an assembly cannot be any 
such ac!; of the Church. Nor can I call as hath been said the Synod of Dort, nor the Articles of Ireland, 
nor the loctrine of the Church of Scotland, nor the readings in the Universities, which be things without 
authority^ for if they be not true and not agreeable then they should bind us, which we would not then 
agree to, iherefore we must be cautious what we make to be the public acts of the Church." 

h He appointed Monday at two o'clock (C.J. 1:925). The Commons .Answer is given only in True 
Relation (p 29-30). 

February i 

» "An Ai for the naturalizing of the Lady Strange, who was a Frenchwoman, and daughter to a peer 
of France, noV a professor of this religion." Lowther 69. 

b "An AcUor advancing of trade, that all merchants or traders may sell or transfer over bonds, 
bills or otherVpecialties, without penalty, by a deed sealed and signed, and the assignee to have as full 
property and aigood remedy as though the bill or specialty had been made to him." Lowther 69. 



February 3 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 121 

Mr. Sec[retary] Coke reporteth that he hath used much dilligence 
and care in performance of the comands of this house and findeth he goeth 
in a sHpery way betweene his Majestic and his people: the Comittee 
presented to his Majestic the Answeare of this house. 

That our Answeare gives noe satisfacion, he cannot thinke that we will 
deny him the libertie of any member of this house to whome it is free to 
bring in any Bill that he list. His Majestic will leave for us the state of 
Religion soe as wee exceede not our limitt in forme or matter : and if the State 
of Religion be as we apprehend he saith he hath wanted power or Councell. 
His Majestic expects we shall proceede with the Bill of tonnage and poundage 
according to his just desires; and if wee doe not he will quicken us.*' 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. That by the Kinges answeare he perceaveth the 
difference of language betweene the King and his Ministers; for the Bill 
of Tonnage etc. was brought in by Sec[retary] Coke in his Majesties name; 
and now the King saith he did not send it to be presented to this house in 
his Majesties name. And since such thinges are put on us to the prejudice 
of our liberties he is of opinion that the member that delivered it soe to us 
contrary to his Majesties intencion is unworthy to sitt amongst us.*^ 

But on a little dispute this mocion of Sir Jo[hn] Elliotts was lett fall.® 
Mr. Pym in the Chayre att the grand Comittee of Religion. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. 

Would have us vindicatt our truth of our Religion on the persons of 
those men who have written and preached Arminianisme, which will best 
establish our truth. ^ 

Mr. Rouse approves of the course propounded. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. That he conceaveth we may make the Articles of 
Lambeth to be as antient wrightings of oiir Church : that he can shew in 
point a truth that King James (howsoever he be now traduced) did not 
above a Month before his death professe that he did detest the opinions 
of the Arminians sects and said it was the same as the Pelagians.^ 

Mr. Corriton. That the intent and meaning of the house is not to 
lay aside the Articles of Lambeth as denying the truth of them ; but that 

' For another version of the Secretary's report and for the King's Answer in full see True Relation 
(p. 31-32). 

^ For this speech see also True Relation (p. 32-33). Nicholas took notes only on the last part of the 
speech. 

e For this debate see True Relation (p. 33). 

' "Sir John Elliot moves that for the manner of our proceedings we may not seem to make or give 
any jealousy to that cause we have in hand being without question, but that first we seek and fall upon 
them, and make our charge on them which have erred from our profession, and then the Articles of Lambeth 
will come in as evidences against them, for a constant profession of the same." Lowther 69. This 
speech is given at even greater length in True Relation (p. 33-34). 

fin A Declaration against Vorslius, King James nine years earlier stated his position on the subject 
of predestination {Works, London 1616, p. 368): "The nature of man, through the transgression of our 
first parents hath lost free-will, and reteineth not now any shadow thereof, saving an inclination to evill, 
those onely excepted whom God of his meere grace hath sanctified and purged from this originall Leprosie. 



122 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 3 

we doe not take them as publique and binding Acts of the Church, 
because it might tend to the prejudice of the truth and the Church if see 
many B[isho]pps in another assembly should resolve on any thing con- 
trary to those Articles as the Orthodox opinions of the Church> 

Sir Th[omas] Hobby, would have us to take into consideracion what 
was here found the last Session against Mr. Montague who did maynly 
crosse and misinterprete the Articles of Religion, and to proceede with 
him and in that matter. 

Sir Dud [ley] Diggs. That it seemes that the Arminians doe all 
agree on the Articles but the difference is on the sense of it: he wisheth 
that every Bishopp in his diocesse should suppresse every one that 
teacheth against the Orthodox sense of those Articles : and that if we finde 
any to have invaded the true sense of the Articles that we pitch on them. 

Mr. Cha[ncel,lor] of the Duchy. That uppon the Remonstrance 
made the last Session, the Bishopps now of Winton and London, did 
after the Remonstrance was delivered both of them on their knees with 
teares in their eyes att a full Councell absolutely disavow and protest that 
they did renounce the opinions of Arminius.' 

Sir Ja[mes] Perrot. That the Bishopp of London did when he 
was Bishopp of Bath and Wells enterteyne one Bayliff to be his Chap- 
laine and has since bene a meanes of his preferment, and that this Bayliff 
did openly holde and defend the opinions of Arminius and say that 
whatsoever Arminius hath written he is of the same opinion.' 

Sir Fra[ncis] Seymour. That the proclamacion against Montagues 
booke is esteemed by his friends not to be against his booke: but may be 
as well against those that oppose him: and he doth not beleeve that his 
booke is condempned when the partie that wrought it is advanced: he will 
not beleeve the booke is condemned till it be burnt by publique war [ran Jt.'' 

Resolved that it shalbe reported to the house as a desire of this Co- 
mittee that the answere and proceedings against Mr. Montague shalbe 
taken into consideracion. 

Resolved [blank] Sub Comittee to viewe the pardons have bene 
granted to Mr. Montague or any others of the like kind and to peruse like- 

^ It was probably at this point that the Remonstrance of the last Parliament and his Majesty's 
Declaration were read as well as the Proclamation against Montague. Then followed a debate of some 
length in which, if True Relation may be trusted, Nicholas has omitted speeches by Kirton, Coryton and 
Erie. True Relation (p. 34-35)- 

' This speech of May's is evidently the same as that given in True Relation (p. 35). It comes well 
along in the attack on the bishops which grew out of the reading of the Remonstrance, and after the break 
in Nicholas's narrative noted above. 

i See also True Relation (p. 35). 

''Seymour was uttering an opinion very common at the time. See Rushworth, 1:634-35. The 
Proclamation was against the Appelo Caesarem as the "first Cause of those Disputes and Dififerences, 
which since have much troubled the Quiet of the Church," and also against any others who by making 
books pro or contra should revive the differences. Many of the answers to the Appelo Caesarem were 
suppressed. 



February 4 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 123 

wise the highe Comission and to procure autentique coppies of them. The 
reason that we may see whether Mr. Montague be not made by a comis- 
sion Judge of those points of Religion against which he wrought. 

This Subcomittee to meete in the Inner Temple hall this afternoon. 

Mr. Pym is ordered to morrow to report to this Comittee in what 
state he left the last Session the busines against Mr. Montague. 
Mr. Speaker in the Chaire. 

Ordered that Dr. Ryves shal too morrow attend the house to shew 
(he being Officiall when Montague was made Bishopp) to answere to 
some matters of fact att the said Bishopps being confirmed. 

Ordered that Jones the printer shalbe heard by his counsell if he will.' 

4° FEBR. 1628 

Dr. Ryves" att the Barr confesseth that Mr. Jones the book binder 
did put in excepcions that Mr. Montague was not fitt to be a Bishopp 
that he refused the excepcions because an Advocates hand was not to the 
same, he was unwilling to delay to confirme him to be a Bishopp becavise 
the statute of 25° H:8'' saith that it shalbe donne without delay. = 

Mr. Sollicitor'^ is of opinion that the proclamacion to be made 
before the confirmacion of a Bishopp is pro forma tantunt and not to be 
taken hold of: for albeit the King sends a Conge de Lier^ to a deane and 
Chapter to choose a Bishopp, yet with it he sends a letter Missive that 
they shall choose such a man and noe other; and that unlikely that the 
intent of the proclamacion is to give more leave to such a man as Jones is, 
then to the deane and Chapter. Besides for cutting of an entayle there 
is by the lawe a proclamation to give out that any man that is in 
Remaynder may come in and set downe excepcions to the cutting of an 
entayle, but yet such excepcions are not legall or sufficyent to stopp a 
fyne to cut of an entayle. 

The Question in this Case. 

Whether att this day legall excepcions legally put in att the con- 
firmacion of a Bishopp doe make a Niillity of the Confirmacion.^ 

Friday 9 a clock Councell of Jones who are assigned by this house 
being Doctor Talbot and Dr. Stuart. 

' See Lowther for January 30, p. 118, note j. 

February 4, 

1 conge d'ilire. 

» Dr. Thomas Ryves was the King's advocate to Secretary Conway. Cal. St. P. Dotn. 1625-1626, 
p. 386. 

b See Statutes of the Realm, 3:462-64. 

•C/. C.J. 1:926. 

■J Sir Richard Sheldon. 

• In True Relation this question is presented by Selden, whose speech no doubt followed that of Sheldon . 



124 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 4 

Peticion of Tho[mas] Ogle. That for 2 papists in Queene Eliz. tyme 
in the North there are 1000 att this day. Saith Mr. Jo[hn] Cosens in a 
sermon att Duresme did preach that the Reformers of the Church that 
took away the masse did injure ReHgion and though they called it 
Reformacion it was a deformacion. He wished there were not a sermon 
in 7 yeares in England : 6 candles lighted att the altar : that he signed the 
signe of the Crosse on the Cushions [sic] and on the bread. They used 
to sing Antems resitting songs as the song of the 3 Kings of Cullen.* 
Organs to play att the Baptising of a child. Lockes upp the seates of 
such persons as observe not such superstitious Ceremonies. The Ministers 
by his direcions are to stand with their faces to the East, whereas by the 
orders of our Church the Minister att the Comunion should . stand with 
their back to the North and faces toward the South. ^ 

Sir Tho[mas] Hobby. That this Ogle is an honest gent[leman] of 
good worth and has heretofore bene a Justice of the peace. 

This busines is left without further debate till Mr. Ogles hand be [hlank]}" 

There are 4 pardons sealed and delivered: first to Bishopp Montague, a 
second to Mr. Jo[hn] Cosens, 3 Dr. Sibthorpp, and 4. to Dr. Maynwaring. 
Teste of the privy scale 28 Dec. Recepe 3 Januar. All the pardons are like. 
[blank] treason, Riottes, all offences of premunire, sp[ec]iall words omnes erro- 
nias doctrinas vele minus orthodoxas et omnes doctrinas falsas [blank] scandalize 
dicta [blank] publicaciones, scriptiones, predictiones et omnes judicia sententias 
sensuras [blank] all thinges that ma[y] make him unable to be a Bishopp etc. 

That the now Bishopp of Chichester is of the highe Comission.' 

Ordered that the former Subcomittee shall examyne who were the 
SoUicitores, procureres and agents of these pardones and all thinges 
incident thereto.^ 

To be added to the former Subcomittee. 

Mr. Sec[retary] Coke, Sir Rob[ert] Pye, Sir Elwell Thelwell, [illegible]. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillips, Sir Nat[haniel] Rich and Mr. Selden are sent 
to Mr. Attorney to know by what warrant he drew the Bill signed for 
the pardons aforesaid.'' 

' Three Kings of Cologne, i.e. the Three Wise Men. 

K In a letter by the Bishop of Lincoln (John Williams) to the minister of Grantham touching the 
placing of the Communion Table, he directs, — i. Not to erect an altar where the canons admit a com- 
munion table. 2. The table not to stand altarwise and the minister at the north end, but otherwise, 
and he must officiate at the north side of it. Hist. MSS Comn. 3rd. Rep. App. p. 214. 

•" There is quite a break here in Nicholas's narrative which can be supplied from True Relation (p. 36-37). 
Sir Eubule Thelwall brought in an accusation against Cosen one of the four clergymen who had been 
pardoned by the King. Sherfield moved that search might be made for the pardons. A committee was 
appointed for this purpose, he being made chairman. The same day he made his report. 

' This is Sherfield's report. 

' It was upon Kirton's motion that this order was made. True Relation (p. 37). 

'' In a formal speech Phelips made the motion which resulted in the appointment of this special 
committee. True Relation (p. 37-38). Upon the motion of Sir Edward Giles, the attorney was to be 
sent for. True Relation (p. 38-39). 



February 4 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 125 

Sir Ja[mes] Parrett. Dr. Tiirner, Chaplaine to the Bishopp of 
London hath lately denyed the reprinting of the Articles of Ireland for 
that they did not conceme England, and he did doubt whether his lord 
wovild give way to it and that himself did doubt much of them.^ 

Mr. Lownes a Stationer a witnes. 

This Dr. Tiimer denyed license to print a booke that is written that 
the Church of Rome is not the true Church : for that he licensed one Hughe 
Chumley that hath written to the contrary.'" Dr. Twiss hath written a 
booke against Arminians; and when it was brought to that Bishopp, the 
Bishopp himself said tell him that he should well advise of the Kings 
proclamacion before he print it, and soe the booke is not yet printed." 

Beard a Stationer to witnes this. 

Dr. Cosens did license Montagues booke called appello Caesar em when 
the said Cosens was Chaplaine to the Bishopp of Winton that now is. 

Bishopp Whyte did dispute in defence of Montagues booke and 
Arminianisme, and that he did lately preach Arminianisme in a sermon att 
Court before the King.^ 

SirRob[ert] Phillipps reporteth that Mr. Attorney gave answeare 
very ingeniously. 

That the last Sumer the King tould him he should draw a pardon for 
Montague and the other 3, but heard noe more of it till Mich[aelm]as Terme 
the lord of Dorset asked him whether he had dispatched the 4 pardons 
or noe, and that he tould his lordship he did not use to draw such pardons 
without warrant for it, and a little after the lord Dorchester now Secretary 
of State" did send him a warrant under the Kinges hands and to insert 
into the pardons such words for printing of bookes and other things as 
the parties Councell should direct. He sent the roughe draught of the 
pardon to the Bishopp of Winton (who had before spoken of it to him) 

- Between this speech and the following is written and crossed out, Mr. Pym, that the busines. 
True Relation at this point (p. 39) notes that Pym made report of all the proceedings against Mr. 
Montague, since the last Parliament of King James. 

' See True Relation for this complaint at greater length. The Articles of Ireland were drawn up 
in 16 1 5 by Ussher upon the nomination of the Synod. The Lambeth Articles were incorporated in them. 
They were without Parliamentary sanction and in 1635 were abolished by Convocation. Hardwick, 
History of the Articles, 180-84. 

m The book to which Dr. Thomas Turner denied license was probably that written by Henry Burton 
against Bishop Hall, The Seven Vials. Burton was answered by Hugh Cholmley in a pamphlet entitled 
The Slate of the Ncfw-Romane Church discussed by way of vindication of . . . the Bishop of Exeter, and 
by Robert Butterfield in a work called Maschil. See the D. N. B. under Burton, Cholmley, and Butterfield 
and see also Bishop Hall's interesting letter to Cholmley on this controversy. Hall's Works (Oxford, 
1863) 8:756-57. Cf. True Relation (p. 39). 

° This may have been William Twisse's Discovery of Dr. Jackson's Vanity which was printed probably 
beyond sea in 1631 and was an answer to Thomas Jackson's Treatise of the Divine Essence and Attributes 
part I of which was published in 1628. Or it may have been Twisse's A (i. . . Arminii Collationem . . . et 
. . . Corvini Defensionem. . . Animadversiones which came out at Amsterdam in 1649. 

° Dudley Carleton was created a peer in May 1626, became Viscount Dorchester in July 1628, and 
Secretary of State in December of the same year. 



126 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 162Q February 5 

who amended some things in it with his owne hands and inserted other 
things, and whereas it was drawne only for one of those men, that Bishopp 
did insert that it should be for all fower parties, and that he did speake 
to him to hasten Cosens pardon. p 

The same Subcomittee are again sent [hlanh] to bring from Mr. 
Attorney the coppy of the warrant by which the pardons were drawne, 
and the roughe draught of those pardons, coppies of the afhdavitts taken 
against Cosens, to know of Mr. Attorney whether any of those great 
lords*! or any others had seen or knew of those affidavitts and by what 
direcions they were stopped. To know of my lord keeper why he made 
stopp of the pardons and by whose solicitacion he afterwards sealed them. 
And if the affidavitts be not in Mr. Attorneyes hands then to goe to 
Mr. Heath of Grayes in[n] who first had the affidavitts. 

5° FEBRUAR. 1628 

An Act for confirmacion of letters pattents granted by his Majestie 
to the Governor and company of the Summer islands. I^ Lectio. 

An Act for review and reversing of a decree made in Chancery att 
the Suyte of Christ. Searle against Sam. Searle and diverse sentences 
in the high Comission Court against his Majesties prohibicion. I Lectio. 

Pet[ition] of diverse Malt men of Hertfordshire: complayning that 
Alderman Cambell 19 yeares since laid a half penny on a q[ua]rter of 
Come^ of Metage that should be brought by the river of [hlankY to this 
Towne coming from Ware and since that tyme this imposicion hath bene 
increased to 2d on a quarter of Malt. 

Pet[ition] of diverse farmers of Essex, Hertford, and Cambridge and 
husbandmen and Maltmen: complayning as before of the imposicions. 

Both peticions are referred to the Comittee of grievances. 

The 25th Article" these words hath in it, and in such only as worthyly 
receave the same, they have a wholesome etc. These words being left 
out is as if the Sacrements did conferre Grace opere operato.^ 

The Act of parliament in 13° Eliz. confirmeth not the originall Articles 
which are att Lambeth wherein the two first lynes of the 20th of the 

P Cf. True Relation (p. 39-4o). 

« Undoubtedly meaning the Lords Dorset and Carleton. 

February 5. 

1 Malt, crossed out. 

* No doubt the Lea. 

• The reference is to the 39 Articles of Religion. 

*> The ecclesiastical meaning of the Latin phrase ex opere operalo is "apart from the receptivity of 
the human subject." Hardwick, History of the Articles, 26. 



February 5 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 127 

Articles are inserted; but did confirme the Articles that were sett out in 
a printed booke in which those two lynes are not." 

By adding these two lynes it gives power to the Church to alter 
Religion. 

A Select Comittee appointed to take consideracion of the differences 
of the Articles and the inquisicions.^ 

This Select Comittee is to take into consideracion the alteracions of 
the booke of Comon prayer, how they came and by whose worke they 
were altered. 

This Comittee is to consider of 2 Canons where it is said that who- 
soever shall say that the Convocacion house is not the representative 
body of the Chvirch of England shalbe ipso facto excommunicated. 2, 
whosoever shall say that the Convocacion house shall not obey as well 
the layty as the Clergy let him be excommunicated.^ 

Mr. Long. That he hath bene since the last Sessions sued by a 
poursuivant to answeare in the Starr Chamber his sitting here in the 
house being then highe sherif of Wiltes. Saith he was chosen a Burgesse 
for Bath in the County of Somerset soe he returned not himself: and that 
as he heareth the intent was that he should answeare Ore ienus, but there 
is noe Bill as yet filed against him. 

The question is now only whether a sherif of one County being after- 
wards chosen Burgesse for another may sitt in parliament without leave 
from his Majestic for that all sherif s are by the Statute tyed to reside 
in the Coimty for w[hi]ch he is sherif. 

Resolved this Case of Mr. Long shalbe taken into consideracion in 
the house on Munday the next.* 

« For a full discussion of this controverted point see E. Cardwell, Synodalia (2 vol. Oxford 1842) 
1:34-60; Hardwick, History of the Articles; Waterland, Works (Oxford 3rd ed., 1856) 2:316-17. 

^ For the members of this committee see C.J. i :926. 

e The reference is evidently to the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical .... London, Anno 
Domini 1603, . . . Cardwe^l's reprint is from an edition "imprinted at London by Robert Barker, 
printer to the king's most excellent majestic, anno 1604" (Cardwell 1:24s). 
The Articles in question read as follows: 

Authority of Synods 
CXXXIX. A National Synod the Church Representative. 

Whosoever shall hereafter affirm. That the sacred synod of this nation, in the name of Christ and by 
the king's authority assembled, is not the true Church of England by representation, let him be excom- 
municated and not restored until he repent, and publicly revoke that his wicked error. 
CXL. Synods conclude as well the absent as the present. 

Whosoever shall affirm. That no m.anner of person, either of the clergy or laity, not being themselves 
particularly assembled in the said sacred synod, are to be subject to the decrees thereof in causes ecclesi- 
astical, (made and ratified by the king's majesty's supreme authority,) as not having given their voices 
unto them, let him be excommunicated, and not restored until he repent, and publicly revoke that his 
wicked error. 

' See Introduction for the different forms in which the clerk wrote up this resolution. 



128 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 5 

Mr. Sec[retary] Coke delivereth that his Majestic hath apointed 
the 18th of this Month for a fast in this place; and the 20th of the next 
month to be through out the Kingdome. 

Mr. Speaker leaves the Chayre and the house att a Comittee for 
Religion. 

]Mr. Pym in the Chayre. 

Mr. Ogle doth att this Comittee averre his peticion against Cosens 
read in this house yesterday and this day. 

Resolved that intimacion shalbe given to Cosens of the Complaint 
against him.^ 

Mr. Speaker in the Chayre. 

Mr. Pym reporteth Mr. Ogles peticion against Mr. Witherington 
and Mr. Jo[hn] Cosens. The charge against the first being in generall, 
the Comittee hath not resolved to send for him. But the Complaint 
against Cosens being of diverse particulars they are of opinion that by 
letter from the Speaker intimacion should be given him (he being of the 
Convocacion house of York) of the Complaint that if he will he may be 
here to answere uppon Munday one fortnight. And that the wittnesses 
as are or shalbe named by Mr. Ogle. 

All this Resolved on by the house on question.^ 

Sir Jo[hn] Ellyot. That in a publique busines there ought to be 
noe charges allowed att all to the wittenesses that are to come to justifye 
it.' 

It being moved by Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy that a Coppy of 
Mr. Cosens Charge should be sent him, it was declared that it is not the 
use of the house to send Coppies of Charges, but when he comes upp he 
may here have a Coppy of the Charge. 

The Kings printers being called in doe say; that they followed a 
printed Coppy printed A° 1616. They have not observed any alteracion 
or difference in the 25th Article in the bookes last printed: that by the 
neglect of the Corrector a lyne concerning the Sacrament was left out, 
and afterward they new printed that leafe againe. 

It is left to the Comittee to send for the Corrector and to report the 
cause of it to the house. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillipps. That the lord Percy doth desire that Mr. 
Noye, Mr. Bankes and Mr. Ball being members of this house may have 
leave to plead in a busines of precedency in the upper house for his lord- 
ship. This is left to them to doe as they will without order. ^ 

K Given at greater length in True Relation (p. 41). 

hC/. C.J. 1:926. 

> Cf. True Relation (p. 42). 

i Cf. True Relation (p. 42) 



February 6 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 129 



6° FEBR. 1628 

Peticion of Fowkes merchant that he offered security to pay what 
should be due, or to pay soe as the officers of the Customes would repay 
if it were not due: they have seized and stored his goods against his will 
to the vallue of 5000£. 

Sir Rob [ert] Phillipps. Desireth that this pet [icion] may be referred 
to the Comittee appointed to consider of the busines Mr. Chambers, and 
Mr. Rolles which are of the same Nature. 

And soe is alsoe the peticion of Oilman, which is that his goods are 
seized to the vallue of 7000£. 

Articles delivered by Mr. Ogle against Mr. Witherington wherein he 
allegeth that Mr. Witherington said that the doctrine of the Chiirch of 
England is heresy: our translacions of the Bible are false, he hath burnt 
diverse Englishe Bibles saying he did it because they were false: did bury 
[sic] Sir H. Witheringtones body to be buryed publiquely without the 
ceremonies, did take away young Witherington who was not willing to 
goe with him because he said he would not be a papist. He hath laboured 
to seduce his Majesties subjects by his publique disputacions, by promising 
Rewards to such as would embrace popery: he was accused to be of the 
gunpowder treason whereby one Hall said he could prove he was of that 
treason, and yet never questioned Hall for it but hath used him with much 
respect: that the protestants of England were heriticks and that it 
were noe more to cut 100 of their throats then of soe many calves. 

Mr. Ogle doth here affirme att the bar that he is reddy to justify the 
articles against Mr. Witherington. 

Resolved that a Serjant att Armes or his deputy shall presently goe 
for Mr. Witherington. 

Sir W[illia]m Bowlstred recomendeth Mr. Harris of St. Marga- 
retts, one of the same name att Banbery* in Oxfordshire. 

Mr. Corriton would have alsoe one Mr. Fitz-JefEeries. 

Resolved that the two Mr. Harris and Mr. Fitz-Jefferies shalbe our 
preachers and they are to agree amongst themselves who shall preach 
first and second etc. 

A^r. Sherland is ordered to be in the Chayre for examinacion of Allen. ^ 

Resolved that the Comittee of greevances shall sett on Wensday and 
Thursday and for trade on this Friday. 

Mr. Speaker leaves the Chaire. 

February 6. 

» According to both True Relation (p. 42) and C.J. (2:927) the second Mr. Harris was from Han- 
well, Oxfordshire. 

*> The examination of Alleyne was to take place in the afternoon. C.J. 1:927. 



130 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 6 

Mr. Pym in the Chaire for Religion att a Comittee." 

Mr. Sherfield reporteth concerning the pardons granted to Mon- 
tague, Cosens, Maynwaring, and Sibthorpe. The Subcomittee findeth 
that the SoUicitor of Montagues pardon one Parson Skule did sollicitt it, 
that Mr. Bart: Baldwin did sollicitt that for Maynwaring, but know^ 
who sollicited for the pardons of Cosens and Sybthorpe. And one 
Watkins^ a clerke that did sollicitt. That this Subcomittee wanting 
power to send for any parties they could learne noe further of this. There 
is alsoe a pardon and release for all debts Sumes of money etc. lately 
imposed by parliament granted to the said Dr. Maynwaring. He hath 
a Coppy of Montagues pardon.^ 

Resolved on question by the house Mr. Speaker in the Chayre, that 
the grand Comittee for Religion shall not only have power to send for any 
parties; but alsoe all such Subcomittees as the said grand Comittee shal 
appoint. 

Mr. Speaker leaves the chayre and Mr. Pym is in it att the 
Comittee of ReHgion. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillips, reporteth answere from Mr. Attorney that 
he saith that one Mr. Heath a gent[leman] of Grayes Inn his kinsman 
acquainted him in generall that Cosens should affirme that the King was 
not Supreame head of the Church of England and that for matter of 
excomunicacion the King had noe more power than his horse-keeper: he 
acquainted the King with this, and his Majestic thought this was only 
reported of Cosens out of splene yet Comanded the Attorney to examyne 
the truth of this: whereuppon he sent for his cosen Heath againe, and 
wished him to produce such as would testifye it, and by afHdavittes it 
was sworne to the full; and understanding that the Deane of Duresme 
and Sir William Bellises were present Mr. Attorney sent to them to 
know the truth of it, and their certificatt differed very much from one 
Kings affidavitts and informacion. Mr. Attorney saith hereuppon he 
thought this would amoimt to nothing, and soe he desisted without any 
mans direcions; but the Bishopp of Winton asked him what the busines 
against Cosens was, and he tould his lordship he thought it would come [to 
nothing, and that Bishopp said that King was a Baggage fellow. Mr. 
Attorney could not find the afiidavitts, but young Mr. Heath hath given 
them a Coppy of Kinges affidavitt. 

Tho[mas] King of the Citty of Duresme maketh oath that Mr. Jo[hn] 
Cosens att or uppon the 27 Aprill [blank] King Charles is noe supreame 

• not should be inserted here. See Grosvenor (p. 174). 

2 One Mr. Wm. is crossed out. 

' After this report, was written and crossed out, Sir Rob. Phelipps: Resolved that the. 

" At this point Grosvenor, who only arrived the day before, began his diary. It is the account which 
the reader who desires the best narrative of events should follow from this date to March second. For 
that reason notes explaining the course of proceedings for these days will be given under that text. 



February 6 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 131 

head of the Church of England nor hath noe more power of excomuni- 
cacion then his man that rubs his horse heeles. 

Mr. Selden saith that Mr. Attorney had 4 severall warrants for 
drawing the 4 severall pardons to the Bishopp of Chichester, Cosens etc. 
signed by the lord vicoimt Dorchester Sec[retary] of State, dated 21** 
December 1628. This was for drawing of a Coronacion pardon with such 
addicions as he should think fitt for preching, wrighting etc. 

That Mr. Attorney gott accordingly the draught of a Coronacion 
pardon and thereuppon presented it to the now Bishopp of Winton from 
whome he receaved it with diverse interlinings alteracions and addicions. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. That these words of Cosens are highe treason, 
it denies the King his supremacy and certificatts ought not in this case 
to be allowed to excuse such a charge delivered on affidavitts for the lawe 
denies in cases of fellony, doth deny a deposicion against any that is made 
on the behalf of the King:<^ this affidavitt doth accuse Cosens of highe 
treason, and for the Attorney to passe it over because of a certificatt to 
himself without acquainting the King with it when he was comanded by 
the King to inquire dilligently of it : would have the parties that made the 
affidavitts to be examined here in the house, and Mr. Attorney himself 
may be the more strictly and thoroughly inquire of it: and the rather 
for that it concemeth a person whome wee have cause to suspect, and he 
believeth that if the Attorney be well examined we shall finde out some 
other persons that were the cause of such stopping of the proceedings on 
the affidavitts, for indeede the slacknes and coolenes of Mr. Attorney 
in his proceedings in a busines of this nature (howsoever it prove 
to be true or false against Cosens) cannot bee excused or answeared 
by him.^ 

Resolved that King that made the afifidavitt, and Mr. Heath and Mr. 
Richardson alsoe shalbe sent for to attend the Comittee about this 
busines. 

Resolved^ that Mr. Littleton as he offereth may give notice to Mr. 
Attorney that the Comittee is not satisfyed with his proceedings on the 
afifidavitts against Mr. Cosens for words spoken by him against the King, 
and Munday is appointed for him to answere for the houses satisfacion 
if it please him then to answere it.* 

* As first written and later crossed out this resolution read: Resolved that Mr. Littleton and Selden 
shall give notice to Mr. Attorney that Monday next is appointed for him to answere giving satisfaction by his 
answere here his slow proceedinges. The difference in the tone of the resolution as well as the fact that 
Selden's name was dropped is significant. The reason for the change in the resolution is explained in 
True Relation (p. 47). 

d See Grosvenor (p. 175) "in law a testimony upon oath agaynst such an accusacion is not allowable." 

« Nicholas compresses into one, two of Eliot's speeches. See Grosvenor (p. 175-76). 

' For the debate preceding the resolutions see Grosvenor (p. 176). 



132 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 7 



1° FEBR. 1628 

Resolved that Thvirsday next wee shall take into consideracion the 
Bill of Tonnage etc. att a Comittee of the whole house. 

A Select Comittee appointed to examyne the complaint against Sir 
Ed. Moseley Attorney of the Dutchy. 

AUen^ allegeth for other of his wordes ig° Jac. a booke sett out by 
King James wherein a proclamacion is sett out and a Relacion there- 
uppon. That Allen saith that some particlar members of this house are 
the puritan faccion.'' 

That Allen said that he spake not of this parliament but of another; 
but Mr. Seldens opinion is that whatsoever is spoken of against a former 
is alsoe against this parliament and parliamentary libertie. 

Allen is accused of and confesseth very fowle language against the 
former parliaments and stiling of the same a puritan faccion. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phellipps saith that he would have Allen sent to 
the Tower and some pimishment inflicted on him in some publique place 
with a significacion of his fault to be for speeches and offences against 
parliament, he leaves the manner and the measure of his punishment 
to the houses further consideracion. 

Resolved that Allen shall have tyme given him till Munday next to 
answere in the house.^ 

Speaker leaves the Chayre. 

Mr. Pym in the Chaire att the Committee for Religion. 

Mr. Sherfield, reporteth that the Subcomittee appointed to ex- 
amyne who were Sollicitors to get the pardons for Montague and the 
rest passed the Seale, did not attend, desireth a new day. 

There are in the 4 pardons" of Montague, Cosens etc. erroneas opiniones, 
vel minus orthodoxas, doctrinas falsas, ml erroneas earumque publicacions, 
scandalize dicta, male gesta. 

It is now confessed by Mr. Lithe (Sonne to lord of Winton and a 
member of this house) '^ that the words before mencioned and diverse 
other in the pardons were enterlyned by his lord and some by himself, 
by his lords comand; and some by a hand which he knoweth not. 

Sir John Elliott. That it may be that those who were procurers 
of such pardons were the introducers of the acts and faults: that this 

February 7. 

' and then the house to proceed to comit was crossed out and above it written in the house. 

■ Selden is reporting the examination of Alleyne. Nicholas got behind with his notes here. See 
Grosvenor (p. 178). 

b Nicholas fails to make sense of this. See Grosvenor (p. 178); True Relation (p. 48-49) 

' This is Selden's report. Cf. Grosvenor (p. 179); True Relation (p. 49-50). 

<> Lyveley, Grosvenor (p. 179)- As stated in True Relation (p. so), he was probably Bishop Neile's 
secretary, not his son or servant. 



February 9 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 133 

lord of Winton is a man in whome most of the faiilts are that we com- 
playne of. 

Sir Dan[iel] Norton. That a learned doctor, prebend of Winton, 
called Dr. Moore being with this Bishopp, he told him he had used in 
King James tyme to preach in his sermons against popery to please that 
King, but now he must not use that kinde of preaching : the doctor said if 
his text ledd him to it he would doe it againe: that Bishopp replyed he 
must not doe it. That the Bishopp fonde fault with the Comunion tables 
standing in the middle of the quire and said it was like a table in an ale- 
house and that he would have it stand att the upper end ; albeit it stand 
according to the direcions in the Comon prayer booke. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillips w^ould have it inquired out who procured 
the Kings hand to these pardons: and would have Dr. Moore sent for to 
testifye these speeches. 

Sir Jo[hn] Cooper. That he being in Dr. Moores house that 
doctor tould him the very same things as Sir Dan[iel] Norton hath 
delivered it. 

Sir Tho[mas] Heale. That he heard Dr. Moore repeate these 
words and say that he would justifye this with his life. 

Mr. Valentine. That one Mr. Tickler did preach att Grantham 
that all those who refused the loanes are damned.® 
Mr. Speaker takes the Chayre. 

Mr. Pym reporteth the informacion of Sir Dan[iel] Norton concern- 
ing Dr. Moore. 

Resolved that Dr. Moore shalbe sent to to come justify this infor- 
macion by letter. 

9° FEBR. 1628. ATT THE HOUSE 

Tho[mas] King" and one Mustion informed against Mr. Cosens; King 
did depose to purpose, but Mustion did speak to noe purpose: it was 
informed that the Deane of Durham and Sir W[illia]m Bellisses were 
present who certifycatt did cleere' the said Cosens, and thereupon he 
thought fitt not to proceede wherewith: he first acquainted the Justices 
to know what they would reply. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. That Sherif Acton, by prevarcacions, by un- 
certeynties, by contradicions and differences in his answeres did conceave 
they were abused for by his different answeres they cotild not learne any 

• This was no doubt one of the many sermons preached as a result of "his Majesty's Instructions unto 
all the Bishops of this Kingdom." Rushworth, 1:422. 

February 9. 

As first written this read: who certifyed the declaration did cleere. 
» This is the Attorney's narrative as presented by the speaker. See Grosvenor (p. 181). 



134 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 9 

thing. Therefore the Comittee was of opinion he was fitt to be sent for 
by the house to be examined by the same on the same questions. 

Mr. Goodwin doth move on the behalf of Sherif Acton who saith 
that if he be againe called before the Comittee he will answeare cleerely in 
all points. 

Resolved that Mr. Sherif Acton shalbe sent for to the house as a 
delinquent. 

Dr. Stuart being assigned of Councell with Jones the printer against 
Montagues elecion. 

The questions on which they are to argue : 

1. Whether the excepcions exhibited by Jones against Montague att 

his confirmacion were legall. 

2. If they were legall then [if] they are of validity. 

If the excepcions were legall and true and admitted then they ought 
to stay the confirmacion, for the law saith if he be indignus his confirmacion 
ought not to proceede. 

If the confirmacion be voyde then he is not to be admitted to the 
Bishoprick. 

A 3d question is, if the confirmacion be voyde, what the effect will be; 
he wiU not loose his Bishoprick, for his elecion doth give him right to the 
Bishoprick, and it will only sett him in the same state that he was sett the 
tyme of his elecion and before the confirmacion.'' 

Dr. Talbot being likewise assigned of councell with the said Mr. Jones. 
Saith by the canon law there are two objecions against a Bishopp: 1 
against the forme of the elecion, 2 against the person elected; excepcions 
against the person are 

1. age 3. birthright. 

2. knowledge 4. crymes of the person. 

If the crymes expressed in the Articles of Jones against Montague were 
to be acounted inter delicta graviora, he thinkes the articles were legall. 

If a confirmacion be made without a citacion published it is voyde, 
and therefore he beleeveth if any man cometh in uppon such a citacion 
and^ maketh the confirmacion contentious, and that his excepcions to it 
be true and legall he conceiveth the confirmacion is voyde. 

Sir H[enry] Martin. That the excepcions legally presented doe 
only avoided the confirmacion of a Bishopp, but the matter of those excep- 
cions being further examined may'' operate to make voyde the elecion of 
a Bishopp. 

2 it instead of and makes sense. 

' avoidc means of course make void. See New English Dictionary. 

b This is Dr. Stewart's argument. 

" True Relation uses doth instead of may. 



February 10 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 135 

Dr. Stuart being of councell with Jones doth say it is not^ more 
unu[su]all to have to excepcions against confirmacion of a Bishopp an 
Advocates hand, then to have a Councelleres hand to a Bill or plea. 

Sir H[enry] Martin. There is forme to be observed att the con- 
firmacion of a Bishopp from which he that doth confirme is not to swerve ; 
the Citacion is to be sett upp att the Church to which the Bishopp is 
chosen. 25° H. 8 there is enacted that if a deane and chapter doe not 
choose a Bishopp within twelve dayes, the King may choose whome he 
will, if they doe then there elecion is good. And the Archbishopp is to 
confirme the same Bishopp soe elected within 20 dayes, and because it 
cannot in all places have citacions sett upp in the propper church, it hath 
bene thought fitt that it should be sett upp att Bowe Church here in 
London. The parliament gave in that Statute the same authority to the 
King as was formerly in the popes and was not otherwise by the same 
ordered: in King Edward 6 tyme these formalities in Elecion were not 
liked but in i8. Eliz.^ there is in a statute a justificacion of that question 
concerning elecion and confirmacion of Bishopps. Antiently the opposi- 
tion att elecion and confirmacion of Bishops was a great profitt to the 
Court of Archesse. These citacions and proclamacions are rather formal! 
then reall, and therein antiquity is observed, and no reason can be given 
for it, no more then for inauguracions of Emperors and Kings and for a 
champyon to proclayme at the coroaacion. And it is not for every one 
to except to a confirmacion imlesse he be a sheepe of the folde and inter- 
ested in his confirmacion. A Bishopp is only passive at his elecion and 
confirmacion, for the proctors of the deane and Chapter were to have 
answered why they elected him and not the Bishopp. 

The same excepcions that were sufficyent to have hindered his con- 
firmacion, are sufficyent to put him out of his Bishopprick. 

Dr. Stuarts pet[icion] concerning release against one Ferris Scroope 
esq. for a bond of 300£ fraudulently entered into by him. 

10° FEBR. 1628 

[hlankY Would have not only the Sherif Acton, but all those officers 
that did doe any thing against Mr. Rolles a member of this house and 
the man that served a subpoena uppon Rolles to answeare in the Starr 
Chamber, to deterre all others who meddle in businesses of this nature 
contrary to the priviledges of this house. Doth beleeve that the serving 
this subpoena proceedes not from the act of the Attorney or his man but 

* After not, never used has been crossed out. 

d See Statutes of the Realm, 4:484-86; also Grosvenor. 

February 10. 

« Eliot must have been speaking when Nicholas came in. C/. Grosvenor (p. i86). 



136 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 10 

from a higher hand, and that without the Kings knowledge; would 
therefore have disquisicion made from whome this act of violacion of our 
priviledges. 

Mr. Alford would have a comittee to see what the informacion is 
in the Star chamber against Mr. Rolles. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor] of the Dutchy: doth affirme that he believes the 
serving of this subpoena is without the knowledge or privity of the King 
or Councell and that it proceedes from some great error and mistake. 

Mr. Selden. That this subpoena is served not only on Mr. Rolles 
who is a member of this house, but on some others, as Chambers etc. 
whose busines depending in this Court of parliament are under the pro- 
tecion of this house, for every Court in Westminster hath power to pro- 
tect the suyters in it: This violacion of our liberties he doth not beleeve 
to be an error or mistake but to proceede from the mildnes of our proceed- 
ings against such as have offered violacions to the privilidges and therefore 
wotild have us proceede rudly against them without delay. 

Resolved that Mr. Rolles a member of this house shall have the privi- 
ledge of this house and that one Nich[ola]s Shrimpton that served the 
subpoena on him shalbe instantly sent to answere his contempt. 

A Select Comittee appointed to examyne^ this busines and to serch for 
the subpoenas and the informacion in this businesses and alP matters 
incident thereto, and that the Comittee^ shal have power to appoint any 
such persons as they shall thinke fitt to attend the house at such tymes 
as they shall thinke good. 

Resolved that this Comittee shal consider what priviledge shalbe 
granted to alP those who have any suytes or peticions depending here. 

Mr. Sherif Acton called to the Barr on his knee, and charged for 
pervericating, for frivolous answering, and contradicting there and in 
other things in refusing to answere att a Comittee. He saith that it was 
not out of any disrespect or wilfulnes, but that it was out of his ignorance 
and for want of memory, and when he by speech with his brother the 
Sherif he had called to mynde more of the businesses whereon he was 
questioned he desired to be called againe to the Comittee, and he would 
deale cleerely with them and give them contentment. 

Mr. Selden: That in 37° H. 8 the 2 sheriffs of London were sent to 
the Tower only for giving ill language to the Serjant who having served a 
process on a member of this house and being sent to the Sheriff to know 
whether he should release him, and the Serjant was sent to Newgate and 

1 search out, take into present consideration crossed out and examyne written above. 

2 Businesses and crossed out. 

' the previledge Mr. Chambers and all crossed out and this . . . to all written instead, 
b the Comittee should read all Committees. See C.J. 1:928; Grosvenor (p. 187). 



February 11 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 137 

the partie att whose suyte the member of this house was arrested, was sent 
to the Counter. 

Resolved" on the question that Mr. Sherif Acton shalbe sent to the 
Tower for his abuse done to the Comittee in not clerily answearing to 
their questions. And he being called in and kneeling on his Knee att the 
barr the Speaker delivereth Sentence accordingly. 

Sir Benjamin Rydiar: That there have bene many publique cen- 
sures and recantacions in Oxon and Cambrige made on such as have held 
tenets of Arminianisme and popery, desireth that letters may be sent by 
the Speaker to the body pollitique of the Universities for the originalls 
or authentique coppies of such cens\ires and recantacions. 

Resolved on question according to the mocion of Sir Ben[jamin] 
Ridiar. 

Resolved that on friday next Sir Jo[hn] Wolstenholme, Dawes, and 
Carmarthen shall here answere their contempt against the priviledges 
and members of this house. 

11° FEBR. 1628 

[hlankY That the order in the Exchequer Chamber was to forbid the 
merchants that they should not take away their goods without paying 
Customes, and the bill exhibited in the Star Chamber against those mer- 
chants that have claymed their interest in their owne goods is to punishe 
those that should clay me their goods. *" Agreeth^ that further considera- 
cion of that bill in the Star chamber against Mr. RoUes and the rest may 
be considered of by the house as a thing propper when we debate of the 
bill of Tonnage etc." and^ whereas there are diverse orders and sentences 
given^ and made since King James his tyme for payment of the Subsidy 
of Tonnage and poundage desireth that some of those orders informa- 
cions and claymes made on behalf of the King may alsoe be here con- 
sidered of by the house too morrow. And that a report may be made of 
soe much of this busines as the Comittee hath or shal perfect against 
too morrow.^ 

Mr. Kirton. That wee heard the King say he took not nor did 
clayme the Subsidy of Tonnage and poundage as his right, and yet by 

" A long and heated debate preceded this resolution. Grosvenor (p. 188-89). 

February 11. 

1 movelh that the has been crossed out and agreelh put in. 

2 desire, crossed out. 

3 against, crossed out. 

a This is Selden's report. 

>> The bill was brought in and read. True Relation (p. 57); Grosvenor (p. 190). 

" This is a resolution passed by the House. See below p. 138. 

"i This is a motion made by Selden and passed by the House. See below. 



138 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 162Q February U 

the informacion^ exhibited in the Star Chamber we see his Majesties 
Ministers doe proceede otherwise. 

Resolved that the informacions in the Star Chamber against Rolles, 
Chambers, Fowkes, etc. for not payment of Custome shalbe considered of 
too morrow by the Comittee of the whole house appointed to consider too 
morrow of the Bill of Tonnage and poundage as being an incident to this 
busines: and that alsoe the Comittee which hath alreddy taken paynes 
in examinacion of this busines shall perfect a report thereof against too 
morrow, and that they shall alsoe then bring in coppies of the informacion 
and order in the Exchequer made concerning this busines. 

Resolved on question^ that noe lawyer member of this house shall 
departe or be absent from this house without leave. And that a letter 
shalbe sent by Mr. Speaker to Sir Ed [ward] Coke to come hither, 
Mr. Pym in the Chayre. 

Pet[icion] of the printers^ and booke binders and booke sellers. Com- 
playning that the Bishopp of London and his chaplaines have licenced 
diverse bookes holding opinions of Arminianisme and popery and suppressed 
others that are orthodoxall, and if any orthodoxall have bene printed such 
as have printed or sold them they have bene punished for [it] by the 
highe Comission and their bookes have bene taken from them. 

Michaell Sparkes, James Buler, and Jo[hn] Beale^ printers and booke 
binders doe affirme this peticion to be true, and say they have the consent 
of all the rest whose names are mencioned under the peticion. 

That Mr. Turner since the last Sessions of parliament did refuse to 
print a booke called a Spur to a celestiall race because there was in it that a 
man may be certene of his salvacion.^ He printed a booke of Bishopp 
Carleton against Arminianisme,* which was attested by that Bishopp, the 
Bishopp of S[alisbu]ry, Dr. Belcanquall.J and Dr. Goade'^ and Mr. Warde:^ 
for which he was questioned in the highe Comission and if he had not 
conveyed away his bookes they had bene taken away, and since that book 

* bill crossed out and information put in. 

» Upon Price's motion. Grosvenor (p. 190). 

' Presented by Waller. Grosvenor (p. 191); True Relation (p. 58). 

« Michael Sparke, James Bowler and John Beale, according to the Stationer's Register. 

^ No clue to this can be found. But see Grosvenor (p. 191). 

• Bishop Carleton brought out in 1626 An Examination of those Things wherein the Author of the late 
"Appeale" holdeth the Doctrine of the Church of the Pelagians and Arminians to be the Doctrines of the 
Church of England (London). 

J Walter Baleauquall became Dean of Rochester in 1624. 

k Thomas Goad was a divine of the Church of England present at the Synod of Dort and was joint 
author with Featley of Pelagius Redivivus. 

' Samuel Warde was Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity at Cambridge. Walker, Sufferings of 
the Clergy (London, 1714) pt. 2, p. 158-59- 



February 11 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 139 

was printed it being the first written against Arminianisme he could never 
be quiett. 

A Subcomittee appointed to consider of all the partes of the printers 
peticion. 

Mr. Sherfield reporteth from the Subcomittee, that Mr. Allison Mr. 
Attorneys man said to the Subcomittee that Mr. Sybthorpe did soUicitt 
his owne pardon and that he said that he would get the Bishopp of Winton 
to get the Kings hand to his pardon. That Lambe*" said, that the 
Bishopp of Winton did deliver him the bills signed for the pardons of 
Mr. Cosens, and Sibthorpe, and that after the Bishopp of Winton did 
confesse he did get the Kings hands to the same, as alsoe to that for 
Montague. And soe it was conceaved that that Bishopp did for the par- 
don of Dr. Maynwaring. 

It was alsoe said° that Mr. Flexton [Blackstone] said that all the said 
pardons were drawne by the Attorney before he had any warrant 
for it. 

Mr. Cromwell saith that Dr. Beard tould him that one Dr. Alla- 
blaster did att the Spittle" preach in a sermon tenets of popery and Beard 
being to repeate the same, the now Bishopp of Winton (then Bishopp of 
Lincoln) did send for Dr. Beard and did charge him as being his dioicessen 
not to preach any doctryne contrary to that which Allablaster had deliv- 
ered, and when Dr. Beard did by the advice of Bishopp Felton preach 
against Dr. Allablasters sermon and person. Dr. Neale then Bishopp of 
Winton did reprehend him the said Beard for it. 

Sir Jo[hn] Backhouse. That the now Bishopp of Winton had used 
the like speeches to one Dr. Marshall who lives nere Odiham as he did to 
Dr. Moore, as one Payne told him, and that the said Dr. Marshall did 
say this to one BrierdsP and Godson. 

Sir Ro[bert] Crane. That he hath bene informed by a very 
honest man and a good divine, that Cosens when he was of Jesus 
Colledge^ receiving of the communion did there at the very tyme of 
receiving that Sacrament reade in a booke intitled a preparation for 
the Masse. 

Mr. Waller. That he hath heard that Cosens hath come to the 
printers office and there hath put out of the comon prayer booke the word 
Minister and put in steede of it priest: and strook out of the prayer for 

™ This was perhaps John Lambe who became in 1629 a member of the High Commission Court. 
"By Alured. See Grosvenor (p. 192). 

o Nicholas has this wrong. Beard rehearsed at the Spittle Alablaster's sermon at Paul's Cross. See 
Grosvenor (p. 192-93) and True Relation (p. 59). 

p This probably should be Bryers. See Grosvenor (p. 193). 

t Nicholas misunderstood. It was Caius College, as in Grosvenor (p. 193). 



140 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 12 

the Queene where it was that God had care of his elect and his seede this 
Cosens struck out the word elect. "" 

Resolved that Mr. Richardson and Mr. Heath shal attend to give 
testimony against Cosens, and one Tho[mas] Wryte shalbe sent for. 

Sir Myles Fleetwood Chargeth Mr. Montague 

1. of Scisme and error in doctryne. 

2. Sedicion and facion in matter of State. 

The first is proved by his books The Apeale and The Gag. 

That he hath published that the Romishe doctryne is as it was left by 
C[hrist], and that the differences between us and the papists are of such 
an alloye as that they may be easily reconciled, and therein laboured to 
draw his Majesties subjects from their religion. 

2. Sedicion and facion in State. 

First he hath layd scandalls on the King James; that he hath cast the 
scandalous name of piiritan on his Majesties best subjects. 

Resolved' that a Subcomittee be appointed to collect these things that 
have bene proposed here and shalbe proposed to them concerning the 
danger of the present state of Religion; the causes thereof, and the Reme- 
dies. To sitt Thursday next. 

Mr. Whittacres. That Montague did say att the Comittee the 
last Sessions that Dr. Linsey did send to him for his booke The Gag and 
followed it to the presse. 

Mr. Speaker takes the Chaire. 

Resolved that letters shalbe written by the Speaker to Dr. Beard of 
Huntington, and Dr. Marshall of Hampshire: to come hither to testify 
against the Bishopp of Winton. 

W FEB. 1628 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliot, Reporteth,* There is a Comission 26 Julii 2° Caroli 
to receave the Subsidy of Tonage untill it shalbe settled by parliament, 
and those that refuse to pay it to be imprisoned. Another greevance in 
this busines is a grant made of the farme of these Customes for one yeare 
ended att Christmas last; and another grant to end att Christmas next 
and these in consideracion of money paid before hand. The Customers 
accordingly seized the goods of the merchants, and thereon Mr. RoUes 

' This sets an earlier date for the change than that given by Campion and Beamont in The Prayer 
Book Interleaved (Cambridge 1866-67). They state that "the Prayer assumed its present form in 1633, 
when Laud cancelled the expression 'a Father of thine elect and their seed.' " 

» This resolution came upon Rich's motion at the close of the debate and hence should probably follow 
instead of precede Whitacre's remarks. See Grosvenor (p. 194). 

February 12. 

« Nicholas came late. Eliot is reporting from the Committee for the Merchants' Petition, the matter 
of Tonnage and Poundage. See Grosvenor (p. 195); C.J. 1:929. 



February 12 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 141 

and others tooke a Replevin out of the Chancery, and thereon the Cus- 
tomers addressed themselves to the Attorney Generall and he to the 
Exchequer, and the farmers make oath that the said merchants goods were 
by them staid only for the Kings use only, and thereon the Court orders 
writing the farmers affidavitt, and for that it was the usuall course of 
that Court to stay all suytes in any*' Courts that were against the Kings 
profitt, and for that this busines was fitt only for the parliament now 
shortly to be assembled to determine and settle the right thereof, and that 
therefore the Farmers should retayne their possesion of the said goods and 
the merchants should the 27° November be heard in that busines, when 
another order was made by that Courte, that the Merchants should not have 
their goods nor sue elsewhere. 30° January another Replevin taken by 
Chambers out of the Sherifs Coiirt, and Mr. Attorney complayning thereof 
gott an order that noe proceedings should be thereuppon: and since there 
was noe place left for the merchants to sue here, he is to make a Request 
from the Comittee that the said Comission and all the said proceedings 
concerning the Farmers and Customers in this busines of the Subsidie of 
Tonnage and poundage shalbe receaved into the house. 

Resolved that the said courts and all proceeding concerning the Cus- 
tomers in the busines of Tonage and poundage shalbe receaved into the 
house. 

Att a Comittee of the whole house Mr. Sherfield in the Chayre. 

Pet[icion] of Chambers, •= Fowkes and Oilman complayning that they 
are sued to answere an informacion in the Star Chamber concerning the 
busines formerly complayned against him in parliament, desire the pro- 
tecion of this house. 

Resolved that this pet[ition] shalbe presented to the house as soone as 
Mr. Speaker shall come out of the Comittee Chamber, and that the sence 
of the house is, that this peticion doth concerne the libertie and privi- 
ledges of this House. 

Mr. Selden. That it is highe tyme to consider how the merchants 
may get restitucion of their goods the Terme being now even att an end,*^ 
and what orders we procured by Sir Elliotts report to be made in the 
Exchequer, and this he thinkes to concerne principally the busines of 
Tonnage and poundage. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. That one of the merchants hath 7000£ worth 
of goods deteyned and thother 2 soe much more as will make it upp nere 
20000£, and these men have paid nere 11000£ custome to this King since 
his Reigne. Would either have us or rather the house to take some 
course to bring these good merchants to possesion of their goods; 

b other. See Grosvenor (p. 196). 

' Presented by Waller. See Grosvenor (p. 196); True Relation (p. 60). 

<* The Hilary Term ended on February 12. 



142 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 12 

that the great block and hindrance is by the order of the Exchequer 
grounded on an affidavitt of the customers that the said goods were 
deteyned only for duties to the King disclayming all interest for 
themselves, whereas they having advanced 50000£ for the said customes 
it is apparent that they staid the said goods only for their owne interests, 
and he beleeveth that, if the Judges in that Court should be triily informed 
that the said duties mencioned in that affidavitt was only the matter of 
Tonnage etc. And would have a message sent by us accordingly to that 
Court to lett the Judges understand this and then he doubts not but they 
will open the passage for Replevins and other lawfull means to proceede 
in other Courts for the merchants satisfacion. 

Mr. Coryton, That till this rub be removed he cannott conceave 
we can proceede with the Bill of Tonnage etc. for if the merchants 
be not established in their right we cannot shew that wee have power to 
give Tonnage etc. that the affidavitt made in the Exchequer is imtrue, 
and soe all the proceedings of that court mistaken. 

Sir Robert Phellipps. 

detencion, of the merchants goods, 

obstrucion, the stay of proceedings in the Exchequer. 

gradacion of this busines wherein he considereth principally the In- 
formacion in the Star Chamber. 

Would have us resolve on debate to sum upp together all these mat- 
ters in this busines presented, to let his Majestic know the state thereof 
and then the wrong done to his Majestic and particidarly concerning the 
informacion in the Star Chamber, for till his Majestic doth let us be free 
men we cannot proceede with the Bill of Tonnage and Poundage. 

Mr. Noye, would have us speake of Tonnage etc. and hot to neglect 
that of the merchants goods ; that Tonnage and Poundage is an ayde and 
Subsidy, and as the merchants pay it soe we pay them. They are the 
greatest hinderers, that seeke to take Tonnage by force : that which a man 
giveth on anu3rty for a yeare, he cannot clayme this as a duty. That 
informacions in the Exchequer are for not paying of Customes grounded 
on the statut of 1° Jac.^ There are Judgmentes given in the Exchequer 
on proclamacion on default: would have us remove these informacions 
in the Exchequer and alsoe the informacions in the Star Chamber, for if 
we doe not right ourselves in these things, we shall but confirme the King 
in the right of such Tonnage etc. and not give it. Wotild have us goe on 
with the busines of Tonnage, and to declare in our Bill that all those 
particular acts in the Exchequer and other places are voyde and of noe 
effect, and contrary to the right of the Subjects, and thus he thinkes 
we shall end all differences, and when the Bill of Tonnage etc. goes on 

e 2 Jac. cap. 33. Cf. Grosvenor (p. 199, note k). 



February 12 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 143 

then we may pray the restitution of the merchants goods which are 
seized for Tonnage. 

Mr. Selden. It appeares not by any immediatt of the King that 
his Majestic doth meddle with any of these proceedings, but that it hath 
bene only the acts of his Majesties Ministers for ought we know without 
his Majesties privitie. In the matter of seizing of the merchants goods 
it doth not appeare that the King was knowing of it. It is apparent by 
the Comission granted to the farmers, and by the relacion of the pro- 
ceedings of the Councell Board that they still said and intended that the 
parliament should determyne this busines of the Customes; and that 
the only stopp and cause why the merchants goods are kept from them is 
the decree in the Exchequer, which was grounded on the afhdavitt which 
was falsifyed by the word duties, and now since those that made the affi- 
davitt have affirmed that they intended by the word duties the Subsidy 
of Tonnage and poundage. Would have us therefore send by order of 
the house to the Judges of the Exchequer to acquaint them that the parties 
that made the affidavitt doe aflirme that they meant Tonnage and pound- 
age which we conceave to be mistaken duties, and therefore to move 
them to call the said parties before them againe and on oath to examyne 
them what duties they meant, and if it appeare to be mistaken duties, 
then they may alter their decree : and he doubts not but they will. 

Mr. Sollicitor, would have us to have the effect of the message 
moved to be sent to the Exchequer to be rather for the dignity of this 
house moved by the Councell att that barr then by message from us, 
because those Judges cannot alter their judgement but by mocion att the 
barr, and hearing of councell on both sides. 

[blanky That the language of acts and things will last longer 
then words, and a cold preamble will not be sufhcyent to nullifye the 
fyery proceedings contrary to our priviledges, and therefore till we have 
setled our right and the merchants right to their goods seized would 
not have us proceede to passe the Bill of Tonnage and poundage : Judges 
proceede according to allegate and probate, and not according to his owne 
knowledge, and since it appeares to the Judges that it were duties the 
Judges did well to proceede accordingly and he doubts not but uppon 
true and orderly informacion they will alter their judgment. 

Mr. Littleton, 34 H 8 it is said in what cases a man should peti- 
cion for his owne goods: doth conceave we cannot passe the Bill till we 
have established the merchants in their right, and would have us ther- 
fore to goe to the Exchequer to informe what duties were intended by 
those that made the afhdavitt. 

Mr. Noye would have us give the parties direcions to move by their 
Councell in the Exchequer that those parties who made the afhdavitt 

' This speech is evidently by Glanvile. See Grosvenor (p. 199). 



144 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 13 

have declared that by duties they intended Tonnage and poundage, and 
that to this purpose they may be examined againe uppon oath. 

Resolved that a message shalbe sent to the Lord Treasurer and Barons 
of the Exchequer by some members of this house; 

That whereas an order was made in 27° November in the Exchequer 
uppon an afiidavitt made concerning the Kings duties, the deponents 
having uppon examinacion declared every one their meaning by the word 
duties to be the Tonnage and poimdage and other somes comprised in 
the booke of rates: that a Message shalbe sent to give notice to the Cotirt 
of Exchequer of this declaracion that soe that Cotirt may proceede as 
to justice appertayneth. 

And this is confirmed by the house the Speaker in the Chayre. 

13° FEBR. 1628 

Dr. Moore att the barr testifyeth that the now Bishopp of Winton 
did say to him that he had heard him prech in King James tyme against 
popery and tould him he must not preach soe now: that the Comunion 
table since the coming of this Bishopp to Winton hath bene removed to 
the upper end of the quyre to stand like an alter, and they call it now the 
highe alter, and there on since the Bishopp hath come there are sett two highe 
candles stickes which they say were the same that were used att the 
marriage of Queene Mary, and all the womens seates are removed out of 
the quire, and since that tyme this supersticion is revested: that Dr. 
Theodore Price some tymes principall of Hart Hall hath used att his house 
to have two napkins laid a crosse, which done he himself maketh a low 
obeisance to that crosse, and causes his man to put at one end of that 
crosse a glasse of seek, att another end a glasse of clarritt, att another 
a cupp of beere, att another a cupp of ale, and in the midest a cupp of 
March beere. 

Dr. Moore is to deliver in wryting the effect of his examinacion and 
what he knoweth concerning the same. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy. That the Lord Treasurer and 
Barrons of the Exchequer will consider of our message and send us an 
answere with speede.* 

Att a Comittee Mr. Pym in the Chayre. 

Sir W[illia]m Bolstred. That there are two masses every day at 
Queenes Chappell before she comes, and people flock thither: would have 
it intimated to the King that none of his Majesties subjects either English, 
Irish, or Scotch that are papists are fitt to be about tke queene for they 
are more violent then the French. That a Comittee of this house may 

February 13. 

a This message of May's preceded Moore's testimony. Grosvenor (p. 203). 



February 13 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 145 

be appointed to inquire by what writ or authority the priests and 
papists taken at Clerkenwell were released, and whether the cheif priest 
were pardoned. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillipps. There are in St. Giles and the Suburbs 
thereabout without London besides Westminster 800 knowne papists, 
which great propagacion of popery is by the only connivenecy of the 
officers, and he hath it from good hands that since the tyme of King 
James there were only two houses beyond Seas vizt. at St. Omer and 
Douay: and now there are 40 houses consisting of 1140 persons beyonde 
Seas maynteyned and supported by the wealth of this kingdome, and 
that since 8ber [October] last they have sent over for money to mayn- 
teyne them. We have good and copious charges given to the judges for 
execucion of lawes but nothing has bene done thereon. Would have a 
Remonstrance to the King to shew his and the States danger, for there 
is more Jesuiticall papists in England, that his not more the King of 
Spaynes subjects and in affecion then our Kings. 

Mr. Selden. There was one priest condemyned which was of them 
that were apprehended at Clerkenwell, the 10 priests which were att 
Clerkenwell had begun a colledge there, and it was to be a house of pro- 
bacion for novellists. There are in Ireland 40 Monasteres for papists. 
And this bouldnes wovdd not be, but that the papists have some strong 
and great persons that contenance them. 

Sir Dud [ley] Diggs. That there are in Ireland 4 Archbishopps 
and Bishopps and 800 Clergy. When he and the rest of the Comis- 
sioners were in Ireland there were few papists and all the great papists 
did take the oath of allegeance; how since that tyme popery is there 
increased and by what and whose connivency he thinks worthy enquyry. 
He hath receaved as much discomfort by the Kings resolucion to send 
Jesuits and preists to Wisbidge Castle, as joye to heare the Lord 
Keepers speech charging the Judges to enquire out such persons soe ill 
affected in Religion. 

Sec[retary] Coke. That it is true there was a colledge discovered 
att Clerkenwell of papists in all order for mayntenance of revenue, 
some Reliques of the Jesuits patron or St. Ignatius were found there, 
the King comanded that consideracion shotdd be taken thereof by the 
Concell Boarde, and order given by the same to Mr. Attorney to pro- 
ceede att the Sessions. 

Sir Fra[ncis] Darcy.^ That att the Sessions there were 3 preists 
tryed, the one of which was found guilty and adjudged, and thother 
2 were discharged, and soe put amongst others that were apprehended 
which made upp 11 persons and they refused the oath of supremac}' and 

b Gardiner (7:5?) misread this "Davey." 



146 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 14 

soe were sent back till next Sessions, when they were expected but came 
not, and it seemes were freed by what meanes he knoweth not. 

Resolved that Mr. Long a Justice of peace that first made this dis- 
covery, and the Clerck of the peace of Middlesex, and the Clerk and 
Keeper of Newgate shalbe sent unto, and a Sub Comittee to goe and see 
by what warrants the said preists and others apprehended att Clerken- 
well were delivered or released, and to examyne the said Clerck of New- 
gate and the Keeper there: and the same Comittee to speeke with Mr. 
Long the said Justice of peace of Middlesex about this busines. And to 
report this busines to the house too morrow. Ordered that Crosse the 
messenger shal alsoe attend this house about this busines. 

Resolved that it shalbe moved to the house that by order thereof 
that all knights and Burgesses shall bring in all such letters that have 
bene written for stay of execucion and prosecucion of papists and by 
whome. 

This was injoyned by order of the house. 

Mr. Long the Justice of peace being here examined, saith that one 
priest confessing himself to be soe was condemyned, 2 others denying 
it were with 7 or 8 others tendered the oath of allegiance which they 
refused confidently, and thereon were sent back to prison to prepare 
them for a further try all next Sessions, because till a second refusall in 
open Sessions they cannot be convicted, but they were after delivered by 
what warrant the keeper of Newgate can tell, but he knows not, only he 
takes it they were brought to Mr. Attorney and soe by him discharged. 

Resolved that Mr. Latham who tooke the house att Clerkenwell and 
Mr. Middlemore that lett that house whereby that use was made by the 
Jesuits shalbe here too morrow morning. And to Mr. Sec[retary] Coke 
it is intimated the house desires to see the papers concerning the busines 
att Clerkenwell. 

Mr. Speaker in Chayre. 

The former resolucions are ordered by the house. 

14 FEBR. 1628 

Mr. Selden, saith that a member of this house ought not to be 
judged uppon a complaint in the upper house* but it ought by the Lords 
to be dismissed, or if they will not, yet we should not give leave to him 
to answeare, for in H. 5 tyme there was a complaint made in the upper 
house by a member of this house against another member and then the 
busines was dismissed because it concerned a member of this house. 

February 14. 

» Nicholas is late again. Selden is talking about Sir John Hippesley's request for leave to answer a 
complaint in the Lords' House. 



February 14 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 147 

He is of opinion that Sir Jo[hn] Hippisley ought not to have leave 
to answere a complaint in the upper house made by one Nichols. 

Sir Rob[ert] Philipps. That untill the midst of the parliament of 
18 Jac. there was not a member of this house adjudged these 100 yeares. 
That the reason why they are soe tender not to have a member of this 
house sued out of the house, is because he should not be distracted with 
the care of answering and following of suytes in other Courts, and 
therefore he would [not] have leave given to Sir Jo[hn] Hippisley to 
answere in the upper house. 

Mr. Stroude, saith that the Duke of Buckingham did by his Con- 
cell (Mr. Attorney in 2° Caroli) answere a complaint in this house, and 
he doth not see why wee should not aswell give leave to a member of 
our house to answeare in the upper house as the Lords have given leave 
to a member of their house to answeare here in our house. 

This busines is referred to a Comittee to be considered of and all 

other of the like incident thereto and to seeke forth precedents. 

To sitt Mimday next, power given to send for Records. 

Answeare from the Lord Treasurer Chancellor and Barons of the 

Exchequer that by their decree did not determyne the right of Tonage 

and poundage by their Injuncions and order. And soe they declared 

att the making of the same, nor did barr the owners of those goods to 

sue for their goods in that Court. But that Court did by these orders 

and Injuncions did only stay such Suytes in other Coiirts as were brought 

by the owners for Replevin for recovery of possession of their goods, 

which they conceave to be contrary to the legall prerogative of the 

King: b^it if the said owners did finde themselves greeved they might sue 

in that Court. 

Mr. Selden. That the constant course of a Court is without ques- 
tion lawe, and would therfore have a comittee to examyne whether it 
appeare by the records and constant course of that Court that what the 
Court of Exchequer hath done in this busines be according to the course 
of the same. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillipps. That he cannot conceave that when goods 
are taken for the King contrary to law, that it is agreeable to the legall 
prerogative of the King that possession therof should be kept by the 
Court of Exchequer, and that noe Replevin lyeth in such case. 

Resolved that a Select Comittee shall take into consideracion this 
busines and the answere of the Court of Exchequer and super totam 
materiam to examyne by serch the course of the Court of Exchequer in 
such cases, with power to send for Records, and wittnesses, and to make 
report thereof to this house. To sitt this aftemoone. 



148 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 14 

Dr. Rob[ert] More hath sent into this house under his hand the tes- 
timony^ he here gave against the now Bishopp of Winton yesterday by 
word of mouth which is refered to the Comittee of Religion. 

Resolved, « that Sir Jo[hn] Wolstenholme, Mr. Dawes, and Mr. 
Carmarthen are to be here Munday next in the morning and alsoe 
Nicholas Shrimpton to answere their contempt against the priveledge 
and members of this house. 

Att a Comittee for Religion Mr. Pym in Chayre. 

Sir Tho[mas] Hobby. That one James^ did say that the priest 
Ed. Moore was by order from Mr. Recorder sent over night to stay the 
execucion, and that he had o? warrant from the lord chief Justice of the 
Kings Bench. That the Earl of Dorset did tell this James that it was 
the Kings pleasure that he deliver the said ten others that refused the 
oathe of allegeance, and that his lordship sent Sir Jo[hn] Sackvill to 
Mr. Attorney for a warrant to that ptirpose, and after by warrant from 
Mr. Attorney they were delivered on security, with two sureties for each 
man to appeare (within twenty dayes after notice to be left att the 
wittnesses houses) att the Councell Boarde. 

Sir Fra[ncis] Seymour. Woiild have us send by such members of 
this house as are of the privy Councell to know of his Majestic whether 
he gave order accordingly for the release of these persons; for he seeth 
noe warrant that the lord of Dorset had to give such direcion for release 
of these prisoners. 

Sir Tho[mas] Hobby. Would have us send to Mr. Attorney to 
know what warrant he had from the Earl of Dorset whereby to signify 
the Kings pleasure for release of these papists. 

Sir W[illia]m Bowlstrod. Desires that Mr. Sec[retary] Coke may 
declare whether the Earl of Dorset were acquainted with the relacion of 
this practise of the Jesuitts colledge at Clerkenwell which was now 
delivered by Mr. Sec[retary] Coke'' and prepared by him for the Councell 
Boarde. 

Mr. Sec[retary] Coke saiththat the issue against these papists att 
the Sessions was whether they were preists or not, but the issue should 
have bene for unlawfull erecting of a society subject to a forrayne power. 

Mr. Selden. That if the issue had bene whether these men had 
bene Jesuitts the proofe was pregnant that they were Jesuitts, and the 
statute is aswell against Jesuitts as preists: would have us to examyne 

1 Above James is written and crossed out keeper and Clerk of. James was the keeper of Newgate. 
See True Relation (p. 74)- 

2 il was done by crossed out and he had a substituted. 

b The testimony was delivered by Sir Daniel Norton. Grosvenor (p. 207). 

Upon Selden's motion. True Relation (p. 74). 

<J Secretary Coke had just finished his report. Grosvenor (p. 209). 



February 14 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 149 

what was the reason the indictment and issue was so grosly diverted, and by 
whome, for this way taken for their triall was a direct way to cleare them. 

Mr. Coriton. That there are some Bishopps of the privy Councell 
and it is strange to see that they were never stirred with such an infalHble 
plott against the true Religion. He would have us see by examinacion 
how Mr. Attorney and the Earl of Dorset can come of [f] from this. And 
that Mr. Long examined why he proceeded noe better in it. 

Sir Fra[ncis] Seymour. The King said if Religion were soe out of 
forme he wanted power or was ill councelled, the power of a King we 
know is great, but when it is put into the hands of such Ministers as 
abuse it, and thereby his Majestic and the kingdome: formerly letters 
were wont to be written by Mr. Attorney for stay of proceedings against 
Recusants for this time, but now such Comands come that there shalbe 
noe further proceeding till his Majesties pleasure be further knowne, 
which is in effect that there shalbe noe further proceedings against them. 
He believes Mr. Attorney hath failed in his judgment if not in his affecion, 
which he alsoe doubteth now by this and other proceedings in like businesses. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. That we see in this busines too much offici- 
atted service in some great persons to prevent the execucion of lawes and to 
pursue them for our ruine ; that the great Lord of Dorset is the man that 
interposeth with the Attorney, and he would have that sought out and 
he believes wee shall find his hands too deeply engaged in this busines, 
for he findeth his hand in other businesses of the like nature for pardoning 
offenders against Religion. 

Sir H[enry] Martin and Sir Jo[hn] Elliott are to speak with Mr. 
Recorder and to seke from him by what warrant the stay of execucion of 
Moore the preist and any thing else concerning this busines. And that 
they shall see the warrant sent by the King to the Lord chief Justice by 
which the priest was reprived. 

[blank]^ Woidd have us see the Bonds taken for the apparence of 
these papists and if there be good bonds taken for the same then it will 
somewhat excuse the fault and we may finde out the parties: Mr. 
Attorney ought alsoe to have had a care to have inquired out the land 
mencioned to be by them bought: and if these papers may be recovered 
then may we learn out their benefactors; he desireth therfore that these 
things may be inquired into. 

The Clerck of Newgate. That the said papists entred into 200£ 
bond a piece, and the bonds are with Mr. Attorney: one Fenweck was 
one of the sureties. 

Resolved that Mr. Attorney shalbe sent imto to know whether he 
received from the Councell Board order to prosecute the busines against 

e Sir Nathaniel Rich. True Relation (p. 78) . 



150 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 16 

these papists, why he did not doe soe, or what instmcions he gave Mr. 
Long to that effect; by what warrant he received bonds of these parties, 
who are the sureties and [to] see the bonds: why since they were not bayl- 
able by law he did not soe acquaint his Majestic first therewith: what 
the sureties are, and to see the bonds. Why he did indite them for 
preists and not for Jesuitts nor for another misdemeanor: that the 
names of the stireties, and to know what knowledge Mr. Attorney had 
of their sufficyency. And why he did take noe course to finde out their 
land and benefactors. And why he did not bind them over to the 
Sessions. Whether he did peruse the papers sent by Mr. Sec[retary] 
Coke: and all thinges incident therto. 

Mr. Long the Justice of peace examined saith, that he had direcions 
from Mr. Attorney to proceede by indictment against 3 of those papists 
as preists, and against thother uppon a premunire: he read the papers 
of examinacion: that it is beyond his knowledge that Jesuitts are traitors 
as well as preists. That when att the tryall he tould the Judges that 
he had papers and examinacions that would declare what they were, and 
he was tould by Judge Richardson that unlesse he could say something 
to the issue whether preist or not preist it was but by words and would 
be to noe purpose. 

A subcomittee apointed to examyne further Mr. Long and 

Crosse concerning this busines. 

16 FEBR. 1628 

Pet[ition] against Sir H[enry] Martin that one Browne did a little 
before his death use some wordes tending to a nuncupative, will get Sir 
H[enry] Martin granted an Administration, and allotted 6000£ for pious 
uses, and kept a great parte thereof for his owne privatt end. 

This pet[ition] was forborne to be comitted to the Comittee of Courts 
of Justice till Sir H[enry] Martin were hard being a member of this 
house. 

Pet[ition] against one Coale against the cutting of the river of Medway, 
which uppon report of a Bill (which was comitted by this house att second 
reading) was delivered in this house to tend to a Monopolie. 

This peticion is referred to the Comittee of greevances. 

Sir H[enry] Martin. Concerning the peticion exhibited against 
him, that Mr. Browne, di[e]d as it was conceaved intestate, thereuppon 
att his intreaty the Lord vic[ount] Cambden who was sometime Master 
to Browne, the Chamberlyne of London, and one Mr. Crosshaw: att the 
kindreds request he did in their presence settle a distribution of his 
goods, and one Gardner said that the deceased a little before his death 
did say he was a dead man and that he would give 14000£ to one Browne 



February 16 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 151 

his prentice and kinsman and 16000£ to the rest of his kindred and 
pious uses: the kindred did desire the rather such a distribution for 
that there was an order or judgment in the Comon pleas, that an adminis- 
trator was to have the overplus of the intestates estate debts being 
paid. He made one Mr. Tho[mas] Gardner of the Temple Administra- 
tor, of the 16000£ given for the kindred he distributed 10000£ for the 
kindred and 6000£ for pious uses whereof 3500£ he hath bestowed as 
by an account in the prerogative Court by which he lost himself 25s: 
the rest of the 6000 £ if there be any more come in is in the said Adminis- 
trators hands who was to get it upp from Italy and out of debts. 

This pet[ition] against Sir H[enry] Martin att his entreaty is referred 
to the Comittee of Courts of Justice. 

Att [blank]^ 

Pet[ition] of W[illia]m Boldstreete against one Conquest an arch- 
papist [illegible] [blank] Conquest and [blank] 

This pet[ition] being directed to the lower house of parliament was 
not read because it was conceaved derogatory to the house. 

Sir H[enry] Martin, reports from Mr. Recorder that he did give 
noe order for stay of the execucion of Edw[ard] Moore the preist: and the 
Clerck of Newgate did acknowledge his error in misinforming the house : 
that it was by the Recorders order, and that it was done by order from 
the lord Cheif Justice and his lordshipp saith he did it by expresse and 
immediate Comand from the Kings owne mouth, and that for the rest he 
did reprive one Smith by a significacion of the Kings pleasure, and that 
if he had not received the comand for reprive of the said Moore from the 
Kings owne mouth he would not have done it. 

Mr. Cha[ncellorofthe] Dutchy. That there is a generall declaracion 
of the Kings pleasure in the Star Chamber made in Q[ueen] Eliz[abeth's] 
tyme and since had bene revived in the late Kings and this Kings tyme that 
there should be proceeded against to condempnacion, and that unlesse there 
were other order from his Majestic, that they should be sent to the Castle of 
Wisbidge,'' which was thought the best way to bring them to our Religion. 

Sir Ro[bert] Phillipps. That since this preist Moore was a 
rec[usant] that was not of an ordinary offence for seeking to plant a 
colledge of Jesuitts here amongst us, the lord Ch[ief] Justice did not 
acquaint the King that his offence was of a highe nature ; and for this was 
too blame and ought to answere it. 

Sir Jo[hn] Stanhopp. When Kings call parliaments they doe offer 
themselves to the Councells and inquisicion of parliaments: would have 
a Remonstrance made to shew how the Kings mercy is abused. 

February 16. 

» "Grand Committee for Religion." Grosvenor (p. 213)- 
*> Wisbech. 



152 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 16 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymour. Reporteth from the Sub Comittee that Mr. 
Attorney by his letters to Mr. Justice Long did direct to proceede against 
the three of those that were taken att Clerckenwell vizt. Moore, Parre and 
Weeden as preists and not otherwise, and to have the oath of Allegeance 
tendered to the rest, which if they refused then they should [have] pro- 
ceeded withall according to law and soe leave them to the Kings mercy. 
He had delivered the order of the Board to prosecute the said delin- 
quents; but he could not have leave from the King to deliver either the 
order for release of those Jesuitts uppon Bond, or the lands which he took 
for the same. He tooke care and gave warrant to the Treasurer and 
Remembrancer of the Exchequer to intitle the King to the goods of those 
parties and a Commission of inquiry was to that purpose and is returned 
whereby the King is intitled to their goods. For the sureties he conceaveth 
that some of them are house-keepers in Towne and referreth himself to 
the bonds : he did not conceave the difference betweene Jesuitts and Preists : 

The order from the Councell Boarde concerning the Recusants att 
Clerkenwell that they shalbe sent to Newgate of whome diverse were 
Jestiitts that such of them as are not convict and condempned shall 
proceede against them till they be convicted and then they shalbe all 
sent to the Castle of Wisbidge according to the proclamacion lately 
published; and to take care to intytle the King for their goods. 

Mr. Attorneys letter to Mr. Justice Long is to proceede against the 
said three of the said recusantes as preists and not otherwise, and against 
the rest for the oath of allegeance. 

]\1r. Selden. Reporteth from a Subcomittee sent to Long that Mr. 
Justice Long sent Crosse to the Attorney to sett downe in wrighting how 
he would have him proceede against the said Recusants and thereuppon 
received the letter from Mr. Attorney. That he the said Mr. Long did 
acquaint the lord ch[ief ] Justice of the Kings Bench before he sate that he 
hath papers that would proove the said Recusants preist or Jesuitts; 
and that he tould att the Courts the Judges sitting that he [had] diverse 
papers that would proove them to be preists, and produced the testimony 
of Latham, he tould the bench that those papers would make it appeare 
that it was domus prohacionis and that it was a coUedge of Jesuitts; and 
the lord Richardson said that they were there to doe right to all men of 
what condition soever, and they were now on an issue; and he being asked 
by Richardson whether he had any other matter, and then he said he had 
papers that would as he conceaved would give good satisf acion to the Jury 
that they were preists, and that in the house where they were taken 
there were Copes and vestments of preists; Richardson said that matter 
was to noe purpose, and that the issue was preist or noe preist: that none 
of the papers were for all this read, but only that of Latham which casually 
fell to the ground. That he did beleive that the papers he had would 



February 17 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 153 

have prooved them all preists, whereby it appeares he made noe distincion 
betweene a preist and a Jesuitt. And that he tould the Judges that if 
they would aske him any further question he would answeare them but 
that he was not asked any further question. 

Mr. Sec[retary] Coke. That when these men were quitted uppon 
a Comission of inquiry to intytle the King to the goods there was a 
question made by the Comission how they coidd proceede to intytle the 
King to the goods since the parties were acquitted by a former Jtuy, and 
thereuppon Mr. Long procured the papers and examinacions to be read 
by the Comission, and uppon reading of the same they found sufhcyent 
matter to intytle the King to the said Recusants goods. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich. That severall messages may be sent to the 
four Judges which were att the Sessions to know and receave their answeare 
to the charge now laid on them in this busines. 

Sir Tho[mas] Fanshaw. That it would be fitt to see the indictment 
drawne for tryall of these Recusants, and that it may be sent for to 
the Clerck of the Sessions. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich. That because there is intimacion given that 
there was some clashing^ and debate amongst the Judges att the Bench 
att the tryall of these preists: he would have us presently to send to the 
Judges to know whether there were not papers offered att the Sessions 
concerning these Recusants, if there were soe, then why they were not read. 

Resolved that a message shalbe presently sent to the Judges severally 
to know of them whether att the [ar]raigment of the 3 preists Mr. Long 
did not offer further evidence to be read concerning the said Recusants, 
if the same were not read then why it was not. 

There are fifteen members to be sent three to every Judge, there being 
in all five Judges vizt. the two cheif Justices, Whitlock, Crooke, and Jones. 

17° FEBR. 1628 

Att the Comittee of Rehgion.* 

Sir Tho[mas] Hobby. That Ch[ief ] Justice Hide saith he never heard 
of any such papers or evidence as Mr. Long saith he offered att the Ses- 
sions against the Jesuitts. 

Mr. Wansford. Reporteth from the Lord Ch[ief] Justice Richardson 
that he is not a Justice of peace of Middlesex but was there only as a 
Comissioner of Oyer and Terminer, that he heard of papers that Mr. Long 
held but he did neither read nor presse to have them read, nor till Satterday 
last he never heard what was in those papers which Mr. Long had concern- 

1 The word disagreeing has been crossed out and clashing substituted. 

February 17. 

» Nicholas was tardy again. 



154 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 17 

ing this busines, and stood soe farre of [f] from Mr. Long as he could not 
well heare what he said att the Sessions. 

Sir Tho[mas] Barrington. That Mr. Justice Jones [said] that there 
were some papers offered by Mr. Long to be read but why they were not 
read 'or rejected he knoweth not for being not well he did not observe the 
passages of the Sessiones. 

Answeare of Mr. Justice Whitlocke.'' That there were noe evidence 
or papers read after his coming to the Sessions. 

Answeare of Mr. Justice Crooke.'^ That he came late to the Sessions 
and noe evidence or papers were read or offered to be read after his coming. 

Keeper of the New prison'^ sheweth a warrant from the Councell 
Boarde for discharge of Joseph Underbill, he having entered into bond 
there with two sureties for his appearance att the Board. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy. Being desired to deliver his 
knowledge concerning this parties release, saith that for this he knoweth 
nothing of it, nor if he did would he declare or discover matter of 
Councell ; but many thinges passe att the Coimcell Boarde which he cannot 
remember. 

Sir Fr[ancis] Darcy. Saith^ that being att the Sessions he doth 
not remember that any papers or evidence were offered there by Justice 
Long. 

Mr. Selden. That for his parte he was att the Sessions but far- 
ther from Justice Long then Judge Richardson, and he will not under- 
take to heare better than his lordshipp: he moveth that Mr. Long may 
declare who were next him att the Sessions that heard him offer the papers 
and can justify the truth of the informacion he hath given here against 
the Judges. 

Sir D[udley] Diggs. Would have the Jury examined to know 
whether they heard of any papers offered by Justice Long as evidence 
against the Jesuitts. 

Resolved that Mr. Long shalbe here on Thursday morning. 

Resolved that letters shalbe sent for Certificates to be sent unto us 
of all Recusants are in all the out parishes of London, and in the Citty 
of London, Westminster, in the Innes of Court, and that to extend aswell 
to lodgers in the Innes of Court, in the Innes of Chancery, in the Col- 
ledge of phisicions, doctors Com[mon]s or what Civillians, and that their 
names, qualties and places of dwelling bee Certifyed, by what licences 
they are come out of their Country, for what tyme they have licence to 

*> Given by Sir Miles Fleetwood. Grosvenor (p. 218). 
" Given by Sir William Constable. Grosvenor (p. 219). 
^ Brian William. Grosvenor (p. 219). 

• Darcy's statement was in answer to Rich's suggestion that Darcy, who was there, should be asked 
what he had heard. Grosvenor (p. 219). 



February 19 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 155 

be absent and for what cause; for Certificate what preists and Jesuitts 
are in any prison in or about this Towne. For Certificates of papists 
in the Court is forborne for present. And if there be any Recusants in 
the Innes of Court why then are they not expelled.* 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. There is some Mains genius some ill angell 
that walks betweene us and the King and State, for we see the Kings 
Care and the Councell Boardes, to have the laws put in execucion against 
Recusants. 

Keeper of the New prison. 

He hath now in his custody one Palmer one yeare, Coles two yeares, 
Townsend two, Walgrave two, that St. Johns being sick was by order of 
the board delivered to Dr. Catiman a phisicion: they were comitted by 
the highe Comission: that they goe abroade some tymes, that they have 
had more libertie of late then heretofore, and that they goe abroade now 
for releife, for they say heretofore they were maynteyned. 

Coale hath confessed to be a preist and hath a pardon. Palmer is a 
friar and preist: Townsend and Waldgrave are suspected: there is very 
little restrant to them : he saith he letts them goe abroade without war- 
rant, but not till the aftemoone or after they have drimke or eaten : they 
were only examined and soe comitted by the highe Comission : that they 
live in great disorderly manner and like libertines drinking, which he 
conceaveth is the cause that none comes to 



19° FEBR. 1628 

Mr. Dawes att the Barr saith that he tooke Mr. Rolles his goods 
by vertue of a Comission under the great Scale dat. ij° Martii 3° Caroli 
and other orders from the Lords,* that he never did heare that a par- 
liament mans goods was free, but only for their persons: he did not 
acquaint the Lords of the Councell till the 20th of Jan. that Rolles did 
demaund the priviledge of parliament. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy, saith that the King and Lords 
did take notice that Mr. Rolles was a parliament man, but those that 
are officers of the Kings revenue he believeth did never till this parlia- 
ment heare that a parliament man should have his goods priviledged 
against the King, and he is not yet satisfyed that he ought. 

Mr. Dawes att the barr examined saith, that he did take Mr. Rolles 
goods for such duties as were paid in King James his tyme; and being 

' This resolution was the result of a series of animated speeches testifying to the prevalence of Roman 
recusants. Grosvenor (p. 219-20). 

February 19. 

» Nicholas is not clear here. Dawes took the goods by a lease dated "13 Martii 3 Caroli" issued by 
virtue of a Commission under the great Seal dated 26 July 2 Caroli. 



156 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 162Q February 19 

demanded whether it was for tonage and poundage saith that he is by 
the King comanded not to make any other exposicion of the duties for 
which he received the said goods then that it was for the duties paid 
in King James his tyme: he was noe farmer or lessee of those duties 
for the last yeare, but only the collector of the Kings Customes, and 
had interest only as a 32th parte or share of the dutyes; he staid the 
goods not for any Interest of his owne but only as the Kings officer, 
and for the Kings behalf: that there are about 10 other merchants 
besides the 4 who have peticioned this house for restitucion of their 
goods, and they have protested they will pay all duties and desire to 
have their names concealed from other merchants. And that the farm- 
ers for this yeare are only lessees uppon account, and have noe shares 
because they depend on the Kings grace to reward them for their paynes, 
wherein' they thought fitt not to have any shares. 

Mr. Carmarthen att the barr. 

That he tooke Mr. Rolles his goods for such duties as were paid in 
King James his tyme, he did know Rolles was a parliament man and 
he told him that he ought to be free in his person and for goods i^ 
and thereuppon he tould him that if all the parliament house were con- 
tracted in his person he could not deliver his goods without further 
warrant. He doth not remember that he said he would not deliver his 
goods, but if he did say he would not, it was because he could not. 
That he did deliver some goods to Mr. GUman, Chambers and others 
by a verball, privatt warrant brought him by Mr. Dawes from the Lord 
Treasiu-er who left it to the said officers discrecion. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. We are to consider first whether these parties 
Dawes and Carmarthen be delinquents both or one^ for having violated 
the priviledges of this house; and desires that this may be here debated 
of them severally. 

Mr. Waynsford. Desires that though we shal distinguishe this 
busines from the consideracion of our priviledges, yet he wisheth we 
should forbeare and decline att this tyme to consider of the delinquency 
of these men, and would have us first to take a course to establishe the 
merchants in possession of their goods. 

Mr, Pym. That it is noe diversion for a member of this house to 
wishe to forbeare a debate question att this tyme: the liberties of this 
house are inferior to the liberties of the Kingdome, to determyne the 
previledge of this house is but a meane matter, and the mayne end is to 
establishe possession of the Subjects, and to take of[f] the Comissions 

' for without crossed out and wherein written. 

* After goods, the words that Mr. Roll crossed out. 

' After one Nicholas wrote and that they and crossed it out. 



February 19 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 157 

and Records and orders which are now against us, this is the mayne 
busines and the way to sweeten the busines with the King and to rectify 
ourselves is first to settle these things and then we may in good tyme 
proceede to vindicat our owne priviledges. 

Mr. Selden. He thinkes it is highe tyme for us now to proceede, 
and he doubts not but whatsoever we shall here doe with loyalty, will 
be pleasing to his Majestic and if there be any that doe misinterpret and 
misinforme our proceedings to the King the curse be uppon them: it 
was wont when there hath bene any point of previledge in question, that 
all businesses else have bene laid aside: he woiild have it put to ques- 
tion whether we should now proceede against these men as delinquents 
for breach of previledge. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Riche. We are to insist on this before we enter 
into debate, whether in the Kings Case a parliament man ought to have 
previledge of his goods, for we have not used when anything hath bene 
done by the Kings comand to the breach of the previledge of this house 
to flye on the officer that has put such Comands in question, but have 
by pet[ition] gone to the King and it hath ever suceeded well: he desireth 
the further consideracion of this, how we shal proceede in this busines 
(since the King gave his comand to seize their goodes) may be referred 
to a Comittee. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. Place your libertie in what Sphere you will, if 
it be not to perserve the previledges of this house, for if we were not here 
to debate and right ourselves and the Kingdome in their liberties where 
had all our libertie bene att this day. 

Sir D[udley] Diggs. We may defer this without any prejudice, for 
it'^was a question in the former parliament whether Sir Ed [ward] Coke 
being a Sherif should be kept away, and the debate of it was declined 
and deferred, and this is more then the previledge of the goods of a mem- 
ber as sure as the person of a man is to be preferred to his goodes. 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymour. If we finde not priviledge here we shal 
not finde it elsewhere, but he is doubtfull whether to take it into consid- 
eracion now will not disadvantage us att this tyme. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy. Would have our wisdome to gov- 
erne our libertie and not our libertie our wisdome: there is a finer roade 
and harbour to all our good ends if we take it. God forbid that it should 
be scene that the Kings comands should be put for delinquency, and 
when that is done Actum est de Imperio. Moveth to declyne the question 
for the present and to proceede with the breach of the libertie of the Sub- 
ject. He seeth the wayes are open to all our good ends, if we take it 
aright. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliot. He hath ever honored the Cha[ncellor] of the 
Dutchy and what he shall say is out of respect of the previledge of this 



158 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 20 

house: Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy said we were making a question of 
bringing the Kings comand to deHnquency : but the question is whether 
an act done on pretence of the Kings comand to the breach of the 
previledges be a deHnquency or noe: he hath heard that the Kling can- 
not comand a thing which tends to the breach of parHament previledge: 
and the Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy said that if we did goe about to bring 
the Kings comands for deHnquency Actum est de Imperio: which if we 
should goe about were an act of the highest treason. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy. Saith he had noe intencion to 
tax any member for anything he said to this point; he saith that if the 
Customers shaU justifye themselves on the Kings Comand, and then be 
punished as delinquents for doing it, then the King seeing that issue of 
it, might thinke Actum est de Imperio that he should be noe more obeyed. 

Resolved that this House shal now take into their consideracion 
the violacion^ of the previledge of this House by Mr. Dawes and Carmar- 
then. 

Resolved that this busines of Dawes Carmarthen shalbe debated now 
of att a grand Comittee: Mr. Herbert in Chayre. 

It being late this Comittee doth adjourne itself till too morrow morn- 
ing, with order to Mr. Herbert to report to the house that this Comittee 
is of opinion and desire that this House should too morrow morning att 
9 a clock enter on this busines.^ 

20° FEBR. 1628 

A pet[ition] exhibited complayning of a great injustice by the Lord 
Falkland Lord Deputy of Ireland against one Bushe* who (as it is 
alleaged) did unjustly cause him to be prosecuted to death thereby to 
get his estate. This is referred to the Comittee for Courts of Justice. 

Sir John Wolstenholme is called into the barr and examined and 
answeareth to the effect that Dawes and Carmarthen. And the case of 
Sir Jo[hn] Wolstenholme is alsoe referred to this grand Comittee. 

Mr. Speaker leaving the Chaire to Mr. Herbert att a grand 
Comittee of the whole house according to yesterdays resolucion. 

Mr. Selden. He conceaves the Case to be that all these 3 Customers 
have taken away Mr. Rolles his goods, yet their cases are all severall. 
Sir Jo[hn] Wolstenholmes case is that he when there was noe Subsidy of 
Tonnage and poundage by Act of parHament took knowingly a lease 

' point of delinqttency crossed out and violacion substituted. 
' and noe other till it be determyned crossed out. 

February 20. 

• Bushyn, C.J. 1:931; Bushell, Grosvenor (p. 225). 



February 20 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 159 

thereof for his own benefitt: that that Comission only to take and levy 
those duties without power to seize: and yet within 15 dayes before 
the sitting of the house he tooke the goods of a member of this house, 
and that he to keepe these goods for his owne benefitt doth take an oath 
in the Exchequer that he had noe interest in the same but only for his 
Majesties use. 

Mr. Dawes case is that he had a 32th parte in the Sub [sidy] of 
ton[nage] and pound [age]: and by vertue of this Comission and for his 
private interest tooke away Mr. RoUes his goods, and yet doth sweare 
that he did it not for any interest of his owne. and the Comission by which 
he did seize the same doth not give him any power to seize but only to 
take and levy. 

Mr. Carmarthens Case, that he did by vertue of the said Comission 
seize the said goods with this^ only difference that he said to Mr. RoUes 
a member of this house that if all the parliament were contracted in him 
he would not deliver his goods. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott moveth that these severall cases and persons 
may be singled and that we may only speake to that point as it shalbe 
agreed on. 

The great Comission^ is dated 20° Dec. 3° CaroH" that were by Comis- 
sion from the King and orders of the Exchequer the Sub [sidy] of tonage 
and poundage till the parliament. He doth by this lease the same to 
Sir Jo[hn] Wolstenholme, Sir Pa. Pindar, Cha[rles] Coquin, Abram Jacob. 

Sir Jo[hn] Wolstenholme saith that there is a Contract in the lease- 
or Comission above mencioned dat[ed] 20° Dec. j° Caroli, by which the- 
said farmers are made accountable vizt that if they loose by it the King 
will bear the losse.'^ 

Mr. Harrison of this house being an officer under the Farmers 
saith that they have a warrant under the Kings hand that if they loose 
by the said lease the King will beare it allowing them 5500£ per annum 
for their paynes and if they gayne by it shal goe away with it. 

Mr. Glanvill conceaves the interest of the benefitt of the grant 
of tonnage and poundage is in the Farmers,^ for if it come to lesse they 
were to have satisfacion and recompence the King being to beare the 
losse, and if it come to more they were to keepe. 

Mr. Noye, woiild have some appointed by us to peruse the letters, 
pattents, the covenants in it and the condicions thereof aswell of that 

1 as Dawes his but only crossed out. 
* ♦/ he gayne and shall have crossed out. 
' and not in the King crossed out. 

b This was read on Wild's motion. Grosvenor (p. 226). For the text of the Commission see True 
Relation (p. 86;. 

This is the date of the lease which followed. 



160 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 20 

parte which makes for them as against them, for they may otherwise say 
the condicions were broken and the interest in the King: and to abstract 
the whole busines and to agree on the course and sett it downe in wrighting, 
that all may see how we proceede. 

Mr. Noye and Mr. Selden are appointed to goe together and with 
the Farmers to^ serch whether there be any Covenant in the said lease 
whereby the Farmers are accountable to the King: for if it appeare they 
are accountable to the King, there wiU be some reason to thinke they 
did for the Kings interest, but otherwise it will be conceaved they did 
[it] only for their owne interest. 

Mr. Pym, saith that as he remembereth the affidavit in the Ex- 
chequer, is that the said Wolstenholme, Dawes, and Carmarthen did not 
take the said goods for any interest of their owne or pretence of interest 
of their own but only for the Kings use; it may be that there is some 
covenent or condicion in the lease that the profitt of tonnage etc. is to 
be collected only for the King, and afterwards it is to be distributed 
among the Farmers to reimburse the money they have advanced; and 
that they seized the same as Officers not as Farmers. 

Mr. Debridge. That all seizures use to be made only for the 
King, and must be soe judged and not for the Farmers, albeit the profits 
thereof by contract goeth to the Farmers, and therefore he beleeveth that 
the goods of Mr. Rolles were soe seized by the said Officers of the Custome. 

Mr. Noye. That said letters pattents dat[ed] 20° Dec. 3° Caroli is 
a demise"^ for a certeyne tyme and for a certeyne rent, provisoe if the rent 
shalbe behinde then it shalbe resede, and there are diverse Condicions 
in the same: half the forfeitures are granted by this lease to the Farmers: 
they have not perused it wholly but for what they have scene in it or 
Sir Jo[hn] Wolstenholme can shew them there is noe clause to shew that 
the said Farmers are accountants to the King : but they have not perused 
the whole only they find that there is a relacion to a wrighting under 
the Kings signe Mannuall but what that is they know not. 

Sir Jo[hn] Wolstenholme examined^ saith he is Collector of the Cus- 
tomes outward, and did by the Kings especiall Command assist the officers 
who were to collect the inwarde Customs. That there is a Covenant 
under the Signe Manuall: that he and the rest shotild be noe loosers by 
the farme if it should fall short: being asked why he being a farmer did 
sweare he did not seize the goods of Rolles for any interest of his owne, 
for he went downe to seize the said goods as an officer of the Kings, not 
as a farmer, for if he had not bene an officer he would not have gone noe 

* advise and crossed out. 

"J Demise is defined as a conveyance or transfer of an estate by will or lease. New English Dictionary. 

' On Kirton's motion. Grosvenor (p. 227). 



February 21 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 161 

more then the rest of the farmers but did this by especiall comand from 
the King to assist the rest of the officers of the Customes and if he had 
not bene an officer who had received the Kings Comand as an officer to 
assist the rest of the Officers he woiild not have gone with them to seize 
the said goods noe more then Sir P. Pindar and the rest of the Farmers 
did. That Mr. Rolles att the tyme of the seizure did not tell him nor 
any other as he heard that he was a parliament man. But afterwards he 
did when the goods were in the Kings stores. 

Mr. Dawes and Mr. Carmarthen examined say that they doe not 
remember that Rolles did demand his previledge of parliament but only 
in the Custome house after the goods were in the Kings store. 

Mr. Rolles affirmeth he did demand his previledge of them before 
his goods were in the Kings store and whiles they were att the water 
side. 

The Comission^ dat[ed] 20° Dec. j° Caroli is by order delivered to 
the said 3 officers and Farmers of the Customes to peruse it to the end 
that if they can finde out the Covenant whereby it may appeare that 
the Farmers are accoimtants to the King or any other matter which may 
make for them they may bring the same in too morrow morning. And 
they are alsoe enjoyned to bring in the Covenant under the Kings 
signe Manuall. 

Mr. Speaker in the Chayre. 

Resolved that Mr. Rolles shal have warrant to produce such witt- 
nesses as he shal name to Mr. Herbert. And that the grand Comittee 
for this busines of the Customers shall contynue too morrow morning all 
other businesses sett aparte. 

21° FEBR. 1628 

Pet[ition] of Tho[mas] Symond merchant that albeit he had given 
security for payment of all Customes and imposicions, yet till he had paid 
the 2s-6d imposicions on currants payable to the Lord of Arrundell he 
could not have his goods. 

Sir Rob[ert] Pye: Saith that the Earl of Arrundell hath surrendered 
his pattent and soe hath noe interest in this imposicion att present. 

This peticion is referred to the Comittee for merchants. 

Resolved that all the members of this house that have any letters 
in their hands that were written in favor of Recusants to stay pro- 
ceedings against them shal deliver in their letters to the Subcomittee 
for Religion and alsoe that all other Subsubcomittees for Religion (as that 
of the printers and others) shal bring in an account of their labors to the 
Subcomittee that is appointed to prepare the busines of Religion. And 



162 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 21 

that this Comittee shal take any course for discovering of the severall 
businesses before them. 

Mr. Speaker leaveth the Chair and Mr. Herbert is in it att a 
Grand Comittee for the busines of the Customers. 

Mr. Rolles saith that he hath brought wittnesses to prove that 
he did demand previledge of parHament for his goods of the officers of 
the Custome house when they seized and tooke them away. 

Spedman Potts merchant examined saith that he was att the water 
side about the 30th of 8ber [October] when 2 packs of grograins belong- 
ing to Mr. Rolles were seized by Mr. Dawes, Mr. Carmarthen, (but Sir 
Jo[hn] Wolstenholme was not there) and that then Mr. Rolles did tell 
them that he . was a parliament man and that Mr. Dawes said albeit 
you are a parliament man, I conceave you are to pay the Kings duties. 

Nath[aniel] Downes examined saith he was present the 30th of 
8ber last when Mr. Rolles desired to have his goods and laid hands 
on them, and tould them att that instant that he was a parliament man 
and ought to have his person and his goods free: Sir Jo[hn] Wolsten- 
holme was not att first present when the demand of previledge of 
parliament was made, but he came before the goods were carryed away. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliot, saith that the affirmacion of a member of this 
house is sufficyent without further proof, and therefore since Mr. Rolles 
affirmeth that Carmarthen said if all the house were contracted in his 
person he woiild not deliver his goods, he desires that we may not ex- 
amyne wittnesses to proove the truth thereof least by such an example 
we introduce a kinde of necessity to have witnesses to proove the affirm- 
acion of a member of this house. 

The wrighting under the Signe Manuall dated 3° Caroli doth assure 
the Farmers that where on the lease that was made by the Customers 
etc. there was the rent of 15000£ per annum reserved, that they shalbe 
noe loosers by it, and this gracious promise was given because it was 
conceaved the warres would abate the Customes. 

Mr. Littleton, saith it will be fitt to know what the lawe is, 
whether a member of this house ought to have his previledge as a par- 
liament man against the King. A parliament is prorogued to the 20th 
of 8ber a member of the house hath his goods seized the 30th of 
8ber: wherein first to consider he ought of his priviledge in general!, 
21y whether in a prorogacion, 31y whether against the King. In all 
which thus advised he is of opinion that a parliament [man] ought to 
have his previledge ; a parliament man is imployed for busines of the King- 
dome, and therefore all privat things ought to give place to publique: 
there is noe doubt but his person is previledged, and it is the same for 
his goods, for if his livelihude be taken away [blank] 



February 21 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 163 

18 Ed. 3 in a citacion of the Earl of [blank]. 18 E. 1, that a man 
sued to have leave to distreyne from Rent in parliament tyme, and the 
Answere was q[uo]d in honestum videtur, but he might after distreyne for 
the arrearages. 17 E. 4 parliament Roll Art 35, that where tyme out of 
tyme it hath bene that a parliament man his person and goods were 
freed. 5 H. 4 parliament Roll Num. 78, in Case of Kedar in print, this 
Kedar was an esquire to the knight of the Shire of Somerset, did desire 
that if any did kill a parliament man or his servant it should be treason, 
if any did mayne one he shotdd loose his hand, if beate him he should 
be imprisoned a yeare and a day, and uppon this it was referred to be 
punished: 8° and 31° H. 6, Sir Tho[mas] Thorpe Speaker of parliament 
was arrested, and the Comons prayed their Speaker, and the Judges 
did resolve that he ought to be released: in 12 E. 4 in the Case of the 
servant the Earl of Essex, Lord Treasiurer, and then resolved that there 
was a Custome that he should not be impleaded. The Lord Cheif Rich- 
ardson being a parliament man would not joyne in Comission: we have 
16 dayes coming and receding before and after the parliament, and the 
proclamacion for proroging the parliament did enjoyne those that were 
about the Towne to attend to prorogue the parliament: the greatest 
service in parliament is for the King for him in particular, and for the 
Kingdome whereof he is the head: all suytes in Star Chamber are the 
Kings Suytes and it is every dayes practice to grant previledge in par- 
liament to stay suytes in Star Chamber : in the case of Mr. Herbert and 
Sir H. Stanhope* it was resolved that in all cases but of fellony and trea- 
son a man might have his previledge in parliament. And soe thus ad- 
vised he is of opinion that a parliament man ought to have his previledge 
for his goods against the King. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillipps: j° Jac. during a prorogacion a seizure was 
made by a writt out of the Exchequer to the Sherif of Hampshire on 
one Kingswill a member of this house, it was resolved and order and 
Comand given to the said Sherif to restore the said goods soe seized. 
It was resolved 24° Eliz. in the Case of one Martin that the tyme of previ- 
ledge after and before parliament was convenyent tyme of previledge. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy, desires that the lawyers may in 
this case speake only Law, and not argue according to reason, and that 
for the last parte of this case that is that by Lawe the previledge of par- 
liament doth holde against the King when it concernes the Kings 
Revenue. 

February 21. 

aHatsell, i:i50-Si; Prynne, 4:714-16. 



164 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 21 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymour. That he conceaveth that in this case of 
Rolles the King hath [not] any interest but that the Farmers have done 
it for their owne interest. 

Mr. Glanvill. That the King had a charge of rent, which is by- 
record and in such Case there is noe Repleyin lyeth in such Cases against 
the King, for that it is an adjudged Case and on Record in the Exchequer, 
Dutchy or else where it appeares, the same is the Kings: We take this 
not to be the Kings Case, for the King disclaymes any right in it, and 
yet these men have taken it. If the King make a grant of that whereto 
he hath noe right, the partie that takes it is a trespasser: for that the 
grant was voide because the King had noe right, and an accion of tres- 
passe lyeth against them. And there being noe right in the King to these 
dutyes as they are called, wee are to proceede against them as Trespassers. 

Sec[retary] Coke. We are not now to proceede on the right of the 
King or Subject att this present, but only whether Rolles as a parliament 
man ought to have previledge against the King supposing that he having 
possesion of these goods he hath a right to them. And the King hath a 
previledge of parliament aswell as we, and having possesion of these 
goods whether the King ought not to have previledge to keepe the same. 

Sir Jo[hn] Strangwishe. That we heare the King hath disclaymed 
his right to the Customes, and we must not then make an imaginary 
Case to suppose the King hath a right, but we are to proceede with the 
Case of Mr. Rolles as it now standeth before us whether he ought to have 
previledge for his goods or not.** 

Mr. Bankes. Previledge of parliament is as a hedge about our Muni- 
cipal! lawes and if that be broken down we shall then have our other 
lawes broken: in this Case of Mr. Rolles we are to proceede that there is 
noe interest of the Kings right or duties now in question, and that it 
is apparent by the Kings declaracion this parliament that he did not 
clayme any right in the Subsidy of Tonage and poundage till it were 
given by act of parliament. And there is in this Case noe interest of the 
Kings Comand; for the King hath given direcions for taking these Somes 
of money, first by pr[ivy] Scale, then by a Comission, and 31y by a 
lease or demise, but in these generall Comands there is noe mencion 
that it shall extend to a previledged man, and it is apparent that a parlia- 
ment man hath and ought to have previledge of parliament before and 
after parliament; and it is manifest that a generall comand doth not ex- 
tend to a previledge [d] partie. 

Mr. Sollicitour. In 38 H. 8 in the Co[imcil] Dayes Booke a man 
that is in examinacion shall during the parliament have his priviledge, 
but after the parhament he may be a prisoner againe." 

t" See True Relation (p. 90) for the remainder of strange way's speech: "I conceive it is plain" . . . 
• C/. True Relation (p. 90). 



February 21 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 165 

Mr. Selden. Previledge of parliament is to keepe a parliament man 
free from any distiirbance that he may freely attend the busines of 
parliament and the Kingdome, and there is noe doubt but it is as great 
a disturbance for a man to have his goods seized as his person arrested: 
the lords as they are lords have previledge for their persons, and if 
they have not previledge for their goods they have noe previledge att 
all.'* The Comission to the Farmers and officers is to take and levy, 
and this doth not give them any Comand or direccion to seize all a mans 
goods, but to take and levy a smaller proporcion : if the duties mencioned 
in the lease were due to the King then by that lease the interest was 
wholly in them, and if he had none then he hath none yet, and then they 
have done wrong and trespassed : he is asstired that had the Case appeared 
to the Court of Exchequer as it doth to us they would not have done 
as they did: that not ma[teri]all whether there were right or not right to 
seize Rolles his goods but whether he being a parliament [man] ought 
to have them free from arrest etc. 31 H. 6 a parliament man ought 
to have previledge in all Cases, but for matter of suertie of peace, mur- 
ther, fellony or treason, and if a parliament man ought not to have 
previledge for his goods against the King it would then have bene 
excepted. The ground of previledge of parliament proceedes from our 
attendance in parliament. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Riche. That it was the last Sessions resolved in the 
upper house that the goods of a servant of a lord ought to have previ- 
ledge of parliament.'' 

Sir Ro[bert] Phillipps, 18° Eliz. it was resolved that the goods 
of a servant of Arthur Hall^ a member of this house were to have previ- 
ledge of parliament and be free from all disturbance. 

Sir D[udley] Diggs, conceaveth there hath bene nothing done 
by any of the Farmers as Farmers but only as the Kings officers, for 
where the Officers of the Customes doe leave, there the Farmers begin. 

Resolved that a parliament man ought to have previledge for his 
goods and estate aswell as for their persons. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy. That he would have us resolve 
first whether previledge of parliament be against the King or noe, for by 
virtue of these Comissions the Customers have taken these goods of 
Rolles, and if the goods be restored too morrow the Farmers care not 
for they will be secured harmlesse on the King: and the warrants from 
the Lords that were to seize the goods of Rolles were directed to the 
Officers of the Customes; and these goods were stayed not for Tonnage 
and poundage only, but for other duties which he will not name, and 

<i Cf. True Relation (p. 90). 

« Cf. Grosvenor (p. 232). 

' The Smalley Case. See C.J. 1:107. 109. 



166 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 21 

if a meane person had possesion of goods soe duly he would keepe 
him in possesion against the King and if the goods had bene delivered 
to Mr. RoUes [Here there is a blank space in the MS.\ 

Mr. Noye. It is resolved rightly that we ought to have previledge 
of goods: he never heard of a seizure for an impost nor did ever heare 
that in such a Case possesion was kept by any Court from any man. 

Mr. Rolles saith that his goods seized were grograins and Mo- 
heres, and there being noe imposicion on Moheres, they were seized only 
for Tonnage and poimdage. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Riche. Since there was noe authority from the 
King to seize, but in case of refusall to imprison, and that the officers 
have seized without direcions. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy. That there was in August last a 
warrant from the King in this very case to seize the goods of Rolles, 
and he desires Mr. Dawes may be called to know whether there be any 
such warrant to seize the said goods or noe. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliot. That he knoweth of noe such warrant, neither if 
there were shoiild we proceede otherwise then to resolve that this Case 
Mr. Rolles ought to be previledged. 

Mr. Glanvill. That if when these warrants shalbe brought in, 
and that there shalbe noe matter in them sufficyent to alter our opinion 
and that the consequence thereof be not well taken, he desireth notice 
may be taken who they are that introduce the same warrants. 

Warrants under the Kings hand dat[ed] 15° July 1628 whereby pro- 
hibicion is given to the Farmers of Customes not to permitt any Cur- 
rants to be landed unlesse they pay the 2s-2d as the 3s-4d. 

Warrants from the Lords dat[ed] 21° September 1628 to the Farmers 
and officers of Custome to seize the goods of such as refuse to pay the 
customes. 

Another to authorise Dawes to keepe possesion of the goods he hath 
seized for such goods seized and belonging to Chambers etc. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy. That now he hath heard these 
warrants read can presse noe more then he hath alreddy. 

Resolved on question: That the 30th of 8ber last and the 5th of 
January last and since were within the preveledge of parliament and 
that Mr. Rolles a member of this house ought to have his previledge of 
parliament for his goods seized 30th of 8ber and the 5th of January . 
last and since. 

This Comittee adjourned till 9 aclock Munday morning. 

« Cf. Grosvenor (p. 233). 



February 23 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 167 

23 FEBR. 1628 

An Act against Corrupcions in presentacions and Collegiatt elecions: 
Comitted. 

Resolved that the house shalbe called uppon Munday next. 

Mr. Herbert in the Chaire att a grand Comittee about the 
Customes. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillipps, 1. The delinquency of the Fanners. 2. 
The punishment of them if delinquents. 3. The way how to restore 
the member of this house to his goods, which are the points to be now 
considered of and first of the delinquency and then of the parties severall 
Cases. 

Sir W[illia]m Constable thinkes we shoiild first consider how to 
possesse the member of this house of his goods. 

Mr. Glanvill. The goods being now in the Kings storehouse it 
may proove difficult how to have them restored, but if we goe to punishe 
these delinquents first, they will be suters for restitucion of the goods 
and therefore would have us proceede first for the delinquency of these 
persons. 

Sir Ben[jamin] Rider. It is comonly said that Comon wealthes are 
more steame then Monarchies; we have reedly shewed our Justice in 
Comitting the sherif of London, lett us therefore leave now some place 
for mercy: a tender hand makes a happyer Crea[ture] then a rough, and 
leaves a lesse scare, I speake not for these men I speake for his sake whose 
Servants they are whose Comands they obeyed: when we have done all 
we can, he is afraide our punishment will be but brutum fulmen, and he 
doubts that when we have resolved of punishing we shall not have 
leave to punishe. We have proceeded fairely and farr in the matter of 
Religion, and he is afraide that rubb will be cast to divert us that we 
may not proceede farther. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy. We all agree that there is a 
wound given, and there is oyle and vineger to put into it, if we put in oyle 
we may cure it, if vinegar he knowes not what may be the successe. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. He hath heard it here and elsewhere that we 
should take heede how we proceede in the delinquency of the Farmers 
least we fall on a rock and that there should be a breach of the parlia- 
ment, and if his confidence of the Kings Justice had bene founded on 
a sand it had bene shaken, but it is better founded: and a curse may 
light on those that shall take occasion by this our due proceedings to 
make or prosecute a breach: he thinkes when we shal have judged the 
delinquency of these men they are able to make satisfaccion and it wHl 
be the right way to have the restitucion of these goods. 

Mr. SEcfRETARY] CoKE. That the King hath taken knowledge of the 
late debate of this house and to respect in taking to sever the act of the 



168 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 23 

Customers from any interest of his Majestie ; who hath comanded him to 
signify that this concernes him in a highe degree of honour and justice 
and therefore would not have the truth then concealed and saith there- 
fore that what those men have done they have done by his comand 
and by his speciall direcions and by the comand of his Concell that he 
will not have us proceede against them for that he conceaveth it doth 
highly concerne him in point of government which he doubteth not but 
this house will take into consideracion. And that this nation will not be 
drawne out of any coUatterall meanes to doe what he conceaves dirfull. 

Sir D[udley] Diggs. That if the King were rightly informed that 
the perticlar of the stay of the goods of a member of this house is now 
the debate of us: and he would have us to lett the King know it. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. Would not have us single out any particulars 
when the whole is but for a case of previledge of this House and what 
the King hath ever used to give us. The Customers did not soe much 
insist on the Kings Comand, but did say they did it only by vertue of 
the warrants which they did deliver into the House: would have the 
Kings message reported to the House, and he doubts not but the King 
will come to right understanding of this busines by the meanes of the 
grand Councell of this House, and that we may att the House consider 
what is best to be done. 

Mr. Speaker in Chaire.* 

Mr. Herbert reporteth to the House that att the grand Comittee, 
that a member of this House ought to have his previledge for his goods 
and estate: and that the 30th of 8ber last and 5th of January were 
within the previledge of this parHament. 

That thus f arre proceede Mr. Sec [retary ] Coke did deliver a message 
from the King of great importance which the Comittee did not take into 
consideracion. 

Resolved on question: 

That a member of this house ought to have his previledge of his per- 
son and goods and that the 30th of 8ber last and the 5th of January 
last and all tymes since that day were within the previledge of parlia- 
ment, and that Mr. Rolles a member of this house ought to have previ- 
ledge for his goods seized on those dayes and since the 5 of January 
last. 

Mr. Sec [retary] Coke, repeateth the Kings Message which he did 
deliver the house. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillipps. The esentiall and fundamental liberties of 
this house is now before us, we are not now fitt for debate: in 12 Jac. 

February 23. 

» Sir Robert Pye had called attention to the fact that the King's message should be delivered to 
the House and not to the Committee. Grosvenor (p. 237). 



February 25 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 169 

on lesse occasion there was a f careful silence; moveth that we reste for 
present, and to morrow morning to consider what to doe, what course to 
take, and that in the meane tyme all businesses to cease. 

Sir [John] Elliott: Doubts it is the feare that some great persons 
nere the King have that if these inconsiderable persones be punished, it 
will open their sins their faults, and that causeth this to fall on us. 

Glanvill saith he sees an overture by a new way now, if it be not 
prevented all will be brought to nought, it was wont to doe good offices 
for the fathers of the Kingdome: it is rudly voted that Mr. RoUes ought 
to have previledge for his goods, would have us adjourne till Wed- 
nesday. 

Cha[rles] Price: That he thinkes that not only the previledge of 
this house in question, but that the fate of the Kingdome is alsoe in the 
ballance: we have good officers and humble to his Majestie, and a gra- 
cious King to his people, but as if we were charmed wee understand 
not one another; he would not have us put it of[f] longer then till too 
morrow least it be thought that we goe away like discontented: 

Mr. Sec[retary] Coke desires that Cha[rles] Price said the fate 
of the Kingdome was in ballance and desires he may explayne 
himself. 

Cha[rles] Price interpreteth himself that we sitt here as the 
body and the King is our head, that if any blow be given to the body 
the head will feele it, and if there be any violacion of the previledges of 
this house it will conceme the whole Kingdome. 

Selden. There are in the Kings Message 2 questions of soe highe 
a Nature as the foundacions of the liberties of this house are in question: 
that having alreddy proceeded soe farre in this busines of the Customers 
as they are apparently delinquents; and they all procure the Kings 
Comand for shelter is of a very great latitude and may extend very farre 
to our previledges. 21y that any other Court in Westminster may and 
ought to proceede, whatsoever comandes is receaved, and we are in this 
point to consider our previledge to be noe lesse. 

Mr. Cha[ncellor of the] Dutchy. That we take this as a highe 
point of previledge, and his Majestie takes it as a highe point of a Sover- 
agnety, and therefore would not have us thinke soe much of the previledge 
of this house as to neglect that of the Soveragnety. 

Resolved that the house shalbe adjourned till Wensday and soe is 
adjourned accordingly, 

25° FEBR. 1628 

Mr. Speaker delivers a Message from the King that it is the Kings 
expresse Comaund that the house be adjourned till Munday morn- 



170 COMMONS DEBATES FOR i62g March 2 

ing next, and all busines att Comittees and proceedings in the meane 
tyme to cease. 

2 MARTII 1628 

Mr. Speaker saith the Kings expresse comand and pleasure be that 
this house be adjourned till too morrow sevennight this tyme and in the 
meane tyme all businesses to cease. 

The house being unwilling to adjourne and the Speaker leaving the 
Chaire was forced into it again.* 

Sir J[ohn] Elliott: He would not have the curse of this house to 
light on the Speaker for he never knew any person that hath bene cen- 
sured by this house. 

Sir J[ohn] Eliot saith — 

Those that joyne with the Bishopps in prejudicing Religion and the Lord 
Treasurer with them not only acting of ill things but building on the foun- 
dacion of the great Master of his preferment, the Duck of Buck[ingham] 
that his hand hath bene in soe abruptly breaking the last parliament: he 
is the head of the papists and Jesuits [blank] and the fear of Religion is 
by reason of his person; and the feare of pollicy alsoe, by exacting from 
merchants what is not due, by altering of the customs of this King- 
dome: the pollicy of forreine partes is to overthrow our shipping; he doth 
invite strangers to drive our trade, and aU our owne merchantes to trade 
in f oreine bottomes : these things would have bene made apparant if tyme 
had bene for it; and he hopes to have tyme to doe it yet. 

There is in this paper a protestacion against those persons that are 
innovaters of Religion, against those that are introducers of any new 
Costomes, and a protestacion against those that shall execute such 
Comands for Tonnage and poundage: and a protestacion against mer- 
chants, that if any merchant shall pay any such duties, that he as aU 
the rest shalbe as capitall enemies of this State and if ever he serve againe 
in parliament he shal proceede against them as capitall enemies to the 
State. 

Mr. Coke.'' That they are not suspicions only but reale acts that 
makes us speake this of the Lord Treasurer. For he that shal seeke to 
aliegn or prejudice Religion is an Enemy to the State, he that seekes to 
weaken the forces and strength of the Kingdome is an enemy to the 
State and he that shal pay Tonnage and poundage or anything else that 
is not according to lawe, is an Enemy to the lawe and liberties of the 
Subject and Kingdome. 



» It is characteristic of Nicholas that he should compress the climax of this session into this matter 
of fact sentence. 

b Clement Coke. Cf. March Second Account (p. 256). 



March 2 NICHOLAS'S NOTES 171 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. That his intent was not to have these things 
voted against the Lord Treasurer but he feares the present interrupcion 
proceedes from the Lord Treasurer, but that in generall we should protest 
that he that shal councell or act the taking of Tonnage and poundage, 
whosoever shall innovate the right of Religion and the Church, and that 
not to be now voted but when we shall meete againe: he would have 
them proceeded against as Capitall Enemies of the State: would have 
some of the privy Councell of this house to represent to the King our 
affecion and proceedings. 

Mr. Littleton comes with a loyalty to lay downe his fortune att 
his Majesties feete, and yet not to forget his duty to the place for which 
he standeth yet he saith and protesteth in generall, that whosoever shall 
bring in an innovacion in ReHgion in the State or Customes is an enemy 
as before. 

Long saith that what Merchant shal pay any thing contrary for 
which there is noe law is an Enemy. 

Sir Rob[ert] Pye. Would not have us goe soe generally as to pro- 
hibite merchants to pay what they will voluntarily. 

Selden, saith the body of the liberties of the parliament is now att 
Stake, concerning the putting the question, that the Speaker saith he 
dareth not put the declaracion to the question; and now if this be al- 
lowed we shal never have any question put for the future but will not 
speake how to proceede now with him: the King in the upper house by 
a publique Comand hath comanded the speaker to obey us and that 
may not be contradicted by a private : would since the Speaker refuseth 
have Sir Jo[hn] ElHott to the Chayre and put the question. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott. That since he opened the paper he hath burnt 
it and therefore cannot have it againe to put it to the question. 

The Serjant of the house is sent for by the King. 

The house will not yet resolve that he shall goe: but since the 
declaracion is made would have us now adjOume.*= 

Mr. Hollis doth say Sir Jo[hn] Elliot has not done well to bume the 
declaracion which was in paper: would have it voted that we should by 
a question resolve and declare that whosoever shal councell, be an actor 
or minister to take the Tonnage and poundage without a lawe and what- 
soever merchant shal pay it is alsoe by the vote of this house [to] be cen- 
sured to be a capitall Enemy to this State. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillipps. That since the Lord Treasurer is named it 
will be his parte to cleere and free himself from suspicion and offence 
laid on him. 

This motion was made by Sir Dudley Diggs. Grosvenor (p. 243); March Second Account (p. 26s). 



172 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 March 2 

Mr. Wansford. That since we have named the Lord Treasurer would 
not have us put the question of Mr. Hollis and the rest, but if it had bene 
att first put in generall he should not have dissented. 

Sir Pet[er] Heyman is sorry the Speaker is a Kentish man and 
for his name, and if we render not some example of this we shal anihilate 
the liberties and dignity of parliament. 

Mr. Maxwell is come with a message from the King to the Speaker, 
yet not admitted. 

Mr. Hollis offereth a draught of what was delivered by Sir Jo[hn] 
Elliott as out of the paper of declaracion to this effect following: 

1. whosoever shall introduce any new religion or favour Armin- 
ianisme, popery, or any other opinion contrary to the orthodox opinion 
of the Chiu-ch of England. 

2. that whosoever shall counsell, or be actor or Minister to receave 
the Tonnage and poundage untill passed by a lawe. 

3. or whatsoever merchant shall pay the Tonnage and poundage 
whether voluntaryly or otherwise till given by act of parliament; These 
shalbe held as Capitall Enemies to the Kingdome and the Liberties of 
the Subject. 

Diverse members call to adjourne. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Riche. If Mr. Maxwell bring a Message to the 
Speaker in privat would have all us adjourne, if it be to the Speaker and 
house we must sitt. 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymour. That the question is now whether we shal 
adjourne or call in Mr. Maxwell, if we call in Mr. Maxwell it may be 
none to our previledge therefore would have us to adjourne. 

The house adjourneth itself tni too morrow sevennight 9 a clock in 
the morning. 



/, ., < - . ^ 



/.A : ^,t 



" ;!^;> A ^ ^ f ^- ^^ : 7^^ ^-^' '^^ 






t^ s.>..^^ 



^*;p^.'y-<^ ^ 






I V' 



3o-v.A,. r^ cA^^ , 



' ^yr-'T'y' ^ty^^^^^'-^ ^'i^;^ 



.^^^ ^'^//" 






^7;.. : ' v^-^ ^/? /^^ '"' 



y 



^ 



-/v ^;„;v7 o../^ r^■.>::■^:/'•':^ 




First page of Grosvenor's Diary 
Facsimile of photograph of original manuscript 



THE NOTES OP SIR RICHARD GROSVENOR FOR THE 
SESSION OF THE COMMONS IN 1629 

16: Feb. L[ord] Chefe Justices answers to questions. 

The Attumeys answere: 16: Feb. reported by Sir Ed[ward] Seymer. 

Sir Jo[hn] Cokes declaracion of the delivery of the Jesuits colledge 
at Clerkenwell. 

Declaracion of the Keper of Newgate: his warrants about the prests. 

Message to the L[ord] Tresurer and Barons: and there answere, 
about detayning of the marchants goods. 

Letter to the universities: about Arminians. 

Alexander Burgesse peticion agaynst the L[ord] Lambert. 

Dr. Mores testimony agaynst Bishop of Winchester. 

Peticion agaynst Cosens : and Withrington. 

Montagues Pardon. 

Affidavit of King agaynst Cosens. 

Warrant for Montagues pardon. 

The Attumeys relacion about Mr. Cosens: Feb. 9. 

Dr. Stewards and Dr. Talbotts arguments. 

The Atturneys bill agaynst the marchants for tunnage etc. 

Message to the Barons. 

These I have.* 

An order. Jan. 2 1 . 

A message from the King. Ja. 23. 

The Kings Speech. Jan. 24. 

Mr. Kyrtons Speech. Jan. 26. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliots Speech. Jan. 26. 

Mr. Pyms Speech. 

Mr. Rouses Speech. Jan. 27. 

The Commons Apologie. Jan. 30. 

The Kings aunswere. Feb. 2. 

The peticion for the fast. Jan. 28. 

The Kings aunsweare. Jan. 28. 

The profession touching religion. Ja. 29. 

2nd session began 20 JAN. 1628 
I came the 5th of Febr. 

» Grosvenor means that he has procured MS copies of these speeches, or what we have called in the 
Introduction "separates." 



174 COMMONS DEBATES FOR i629 February 6 

6 FEBR[UARY] 

The House into a Committee:* Mr. Pym in the Chaire. Pardons of 
Bishop of Chichester: 2 Dr. Maynwaring: 3 Cosens. 4 Sibthorpe: 
reported by Mr. Sherfeld. 

1, Who drew those 4 pardons. 2, upon whose suggestions^ they were 
soe drawne: 3, who sollicited the passage of those pardons in the 
[illegible].^ Touching Mountagues pardon they find that one parson 
Skull whose Christian name they found not yet: he hath gone through 
most of the [illegible].^ 

For Manwaringes pardon Mr. Bartholomew Baldwin a Clerke of the 
Faculties sollicited it but as for Sibthorpe and Cosens they find not. One 
Mr. William Watkins a Clerke of the Privy Scale can give informacion. 
Require to have liberty to send for any: 4 pardons granted since the last 
session. They have now found a 5th to Docter Maynwaringe. Notes of it 
in the temple [?] office 16 July: dated: a pardon [gjranted to Dr. Mayn- 
waringe" for all sums, punishments, etc. inflicted and forfeited by him by 
sentence^ of Parlament. Hee delivered in a coppy of Dr. Mountagues 
pardon. 

Sir Robert Phillips: moved to have there powers inlarged to send 
for persons. The Speker returned: and ordered that any subcommittee 
for Religion shold have power to send for persons, records etc. 

Mimday is appoynted to argue the legality of Mountagues con- 
firmacion. 

The Speaker went forth. Mr. Pym in the Chaire. 

Sir Robert Phillips reported from the subcommittee what they had 
done with Mr. Attumey: about the 4 pardons in matter of writing and 
matter of Relacion. For that of writing is to be reported by Mr. Selden. 
For that of relacion wisheth in this to inquire whether there were such 
affidavits taken by his direction etc. 

He told us that a kinsman of his one Heath of Greys Inne came to 
him in Michelmas last and told him in generall way some things concern- 
ing Cosens: but instanced oft these words that in a publick meeting he 
shold afhrme the King was not supreme head of the church: that in Ex- 
communicacions the King had noe more authorety then his man that rubed 
his horses heeles: that hereupon he lett the King know what he h[e]ard 
and how he h[e]ard it: the King was unwilling to beleeve that any man 
shold say soe: but that the report proceded from 'malice: yet charged him 

February 6. 

1 suggestions written above significance which is crossed out. 

• Committee for Religion. 

*> The other accounts give no help in deciphering this word. 

• For the order for the pardon see Cal. St. P. Dom. 1628-29, p. 196. 
i For the sentence see L.J. 3:855-56. 



February 6 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 175 

to make inquisicion after it: and if he found it probable then to repayre 
agayne to him : this made him to be diligent and exact : sent for Mr. Heath 
to be better informed: told him that the matter was soe foule that he 
thought there was a mistake in it: and demanded if any man wod swere 
it: affidavits brought: it was sworne poynt blank: yet Mr. Atturney sent 
over his letters to some gentlemen that he understood to be present^ that 
they wod certify the truth of what they h[e]ard Cosens speke. Hereupon 
the gentlemen returned answers : but differed much in the words, and occa- 
sion why the words were spoken: upon this Mr. Att[orney] finding the 
busines lessened and some malice: proceeded not in it. He seyd that he 
had received noe advice or command to desist only he met with the Bishop 
of Winchester who asked him of this busines informed against Mr. Cosens : 
telling him' that the busines wod be nothing that King his cousin was 
a man not to be credited. That he had not given the King any account 
of this busines because he thought it wod come to nothing. Being asked 
for the Affidavits: he was willing but could not find them: but that Mr. 
Heath his cosen had one of them. That Mr. Selden inquired out Mr. 
Heath: who delivered them a coppy of Kings « affidavit: which was read 
that upon 27- Aprill last Cosens spoke of King Charles the words formerly 
written. Etc. 

Mr. Selden: reported the matter of writing which he received from 
Mr. Atturney. 

1 the warrant. 2 the full coppies of the pardons. Mr. Att[orney] 
shewed 4 severall warrants al[l] subscribed with the name of the Lord of 
Dorchester: we tooke a coppie of one: they al being the same. 

The warrant read: a pardon for Mountague: a Coronacion pardon: 
and other words, writing, printing or preaching for the time past etc. 

The Att[omey] drew a Coronacion pardon and inserted some words: 
but then taking consideracion that this maner was unusuall: he sent 
it to the Bishop of Winchester, that from him he might receive such 
amendments as might be according to the Kings grace. It was returned 
interlyned with other hands. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott. The Kings honour and right are both questioned 
by Cosens words: not fitt for us to pass it over slightly: This is high 
treason: grounded upon oath not upon supposicion: this presented to the 
Att[orney]: his Majestic acquainted with it: he commanded the Att[orney] 
to examine it: and that he shod know how it stood. In law a testimony 
upon oath agayst such an accusacion is not allowable to them: shold this 
letter procure a certificate to discharge this affidavit. This not fitt for 
his place. He acquainted the Bishop of Winchester with it (you know his 

'According to Nicholas (p. ijo) the reference is to the Dean of Durham and Sir William Bellasis. 

' i.e. the Bishop told the Attorney. 

K Thomas King of Durham. Nicholas (p. 130). 



176 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 6 

relacion to Cosens :) that the Bishop said that Jack Cosens did not commit 
such an error, moved that the persons that made the affidavits may be 
sent for and that Mr. Att[omey] shod be questioned upon what reasons 
he soe sleightly passed this over: and if the Att[orney] or others are found 
gilty that we spare them not. 

Cosens a man charged as a Criminous man and soe obnoxious to the 
peace of the Church that we thought him a great cause of the dissensions : 
that he shod be thus sleighted not else. 

Sir He[nry] Mildmay: This abuse deserves a thro inquisition. 
That we first find Cosens guilty of the fact before we fall to inqmreinto 
the fall of the Atturney. That Sir William Bellasis and the other gentle- 
men reported to heare the words might be sent for up hether. 

Sir Jo[hn] Elliott counselled not to stay proceeding agayst Mr. 
Att[orney] for whether the fact were true or false all one: he ought to 
have proceeded faithfully: and hoped that when the Att[orney] came to 
justefy himself he wod discover those greater persons who commanded 
him not to proceede. 

Ordered, that King shod bee sent for to know whether he would justify 
his affidavit: Mr. Heath was sent for presently to come to the Com- 
ittee from the Kings bench Bar: vis he was a reporter. 

Sir J[ohn] Eliott. That Mr. Atturney be sent for and examined 
before the grand Comittee. 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May: wold not have us to spar Mr. Atturney: fitt 
for ministers of state to be carefull, before they bring mens lifes or good 
names in question. Moved to see what grounds we have for it before 
we question Mr. Atturney. 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymer. He cold not excuse Mr. Atturney: for he 
had not proceded as the King bade him: but moved first to examine 
King how he can prove his affidavit: and then to proced with the 
Att[orney]. 

Mr. Wansford. Neyther Mr. Cosens nor Mr. Atturney fitt to sleepe. 
For this greves us, when his Majesties grace goes swiftly to these malignant 
persons and slowly towards his best subjects: who have as good an interest. 

Mr. Noy. Cosens wold have the Church without a head, that is 
he wold have us have noe Church: for before I send for the Att[orney] 
hether I wold be resolved of the matter of fact : and a question out of it : 
whether the Att[omey] doe sitt in the Lords house by the Kings writt: 
and then whether wee have used to send for any thence. 

Mr. Littleton: to procede with Mr. Att[omey] before Cosens: and 
till he were hard to have a favourable opinion of him. To give him a 
day, if he list to come to the house and answer his accusacion. 



February 7 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 177 

Mr. Speaker undertook to give Mr. Attumey notice that this house 
was pleased to give him hearinge upon Munday, if he pleased to be 
better satisfied in his proceding agaynst Cosens. 

Mr. Steward. That he consented not that the Speaker shold give 
him notice : because his place was of dignity : etc. 

Mr. Littleton and Mr. Selden undertook to give him intimacion.'^ 

FEB. 7 

1°. An Act for the better preserving of his Majesties Revenue. 

1°. An Act to prevent corrupcion in elections to hedships, fellow- 
ships and schollerships in colledges and halls. 

Mr. Kirton moved for a tyme for Subsedy of Tunnage and Poundage. 

Sir Walter Earle: without our God one with matter of Religion we 
can looke for noe blessinge. It hath gone on with leaden feet: hath bene 
spun out with busines of lesse moment. To give to God, the King and 
our Countrey what is theres: and he that will not give all these there 
dues: let him intergate the income of an miscreant. 

Mr. Waller: If this retarded Religion I wold not consent: but 
Religion consisteth in justice towards man, as piety towards God. Moved 
for the marchants goods to be restored which were in danger to be spoyled. 

Mr. Valentyne would have Thursday for the Bill of Tunnage. 

By question resolved that upon Thursday next the House shalbe 
turned into a Committee to take into consideracion a Bill for Tunnage 
and Pondage and all the Incidents. Mr. Shervile appoynted to take the 
Chayre. 

Sir Robert Phillips: reported from the Committee of Coiurts of 
Justice that they received a petition by Mr. Noell wherein observe the 
persons and the matter. The person Sir Ed [ward] Mosley atturney in 
the Duchy Courts: the other Tho[mas] Mosley: The matter is opposi- 
tion: injustice: vexation: 5 articles concerning Mr. Noell: the first that 
Sir Edward used passionate words and threats against him. The charge 
that Noells ancestors livinge for 400 yeares much added informacions 
against him. That he compounded with Brograve for 80£ to have a 
decree from him: and a declaracion the King had noe right: but that 
fayled. After he compounded for 50£ and had a decree upon payment. 
That Sir Ed [ward] Mosley used to correct or alter orders in his chamber. 
The Comittee considered that this busines had bene here formerly, and 
had bene committed to a speciall Comittee:* and wished it might be now 

^ See Nethersole (p. 250) for Attorney Heath's confinement from Saturday until Monday. 

February 7. 

» In the session of 1628. C.J. 1:915, 916. 



178 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 7 

setled in a select committee: and that Sir Nat[haniel] Rich andMr. Cor- 
bett who had formerly taken notes of this shold attend the committee,^ 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May: We are here the Lords of fame: a good name 
in this house is a precious inheritance let me intreat you that till he make 
his answer you will have a good opinion of him. 

A select Committee Monday Cort of Wards. Authority to send for 
witnesses: and Counsell assigned. 

Mr. Selden reported concerning Allen: accused by Prichin" by 
Articles : two wherof concern the priviledge of the house : and those I report : 
the first article of those two: that Allen doth charge the Puritan faction 
who agree with the Jesuits to be the very cause of the overthrow of his 
Majesties armies. 

The other that these men oppose royall power upon these words 
nolumus mutare leges. 

A letter of Allen to Mr. Burton. 

But you make [blank] 

I am stue the Puritan faction was the cause : 

The[y] like watermen provoked to war but loked*^ another way. 

Wee asked him what he meant by Puritan faction: by supplies^ etc. 
After a good while: he sayd he had a good authority to produce: he 
then brought a book published 19° Jacob. 

About the passages of Pari [lament] he design [at ]ed divers places: as 
that of the protestacion to give the King supplies. In 13 page: to shew 
who were the Puritan faction: he produced that those who undertoke in 
the house to dispute the prerogative etc. That he desired them to note 
that it was not this Parliament] he spoke of but an other. ^ 

Sir Robert Phillips. I served in that Pari [lament] which gave 
his Majestic then as ample testimony of duty and love as any Parlia- 
ment] ever since did or could doe: Since we live in that Parlament and 
in those that may be 200 yeares after: to be an honest man is now to 
be a Piuritan: for to give us this aspersion we can not give too great a 
punishment: these are the men that set dissension betwixt the King and 
us. Since this man hath given an Index of his harte that we send him 

•> For the members of this committee see C.J. 1:927. 

Prigeon. C.J. 1:927. 

d Grosvenor spoils the figure. See True Relation (p. 48). 

e AUeyne had declared as part of his second charge that the Puritans denied supplies. See True Rela- 
tion (p. 48). 

« There was no printed book of proceedings for this parliament. Whether there was a manuscript 
collection of separates dealing with the parliament has been adequately discussed in the Introduction. 
(See p. Ivii.) The Commons Journals make a little clearer than Grosvenor what this was. It was 
a "book printed 19 Jac. wherein a promise of supply is recited to have been made by us." Selden's 
report in the Commons Journals makes Alleyne refer to the "Puritan faction, those which in that book 
are by King James found fault with." This printed book was none other than the King's proclamation 
given out at the end of the parliament. For that proclamation see O.P.H. 5:516-25. 



February 7 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 179 

to the Tower : to apoynt him in some pubhke place to testef y the occasion 
of his Punishment. 

Mr. Littleton: that he might first be heard: and then punished. ^ 
Mr. Pym in the chayer 

Mr. Selden reported :'^ the warrant by which the 4 pardons were 
drawne that they had compared the rough draught of the pardon with 
the pardon it self: and for the most part agreeable. When Mr. Att[omey] 
had given direction to his Clerk to make a draught of his coronacion pardon: 
this was brought to him : he altered somethings of forme to fitt it for the 
persons. Then finding that diverse other things were to be pardoned: as 
printing of books and for opinions : he inserted words : couciones, sermones 
etc. editi [illegible]: then answered that these things were vane, and con- 
sidering that the Clergie cold tell better what to doe in that: he sent 
the draught to the Bishop of Winchester and was returned with these 
addicions. As first the 4 names of Cosens, Manwaring etc.: these words: 
et malege, [illegible] opiniones habitas ab ullis et erronias, vel minus ortho- 
doxas earumque publications et omne doctrinas falsas scandale dictas etc. 

In the end of the sheete these words. 

If Dr. Maynwaring shold have one of these pardons: he must have 
more words then these. 

Et omnia et singula judicia censura supp 

venas, penalitates 

Per aliquam Curiam ipsa regu nostrae Angliae habita. Tibi per suprem 
pardonenti curiam [illegible] 

omnia crimina et errata. 

aut aliis iudiciis quibuscumque. In margen. 

I hold the Pari [lament] to be Curia Domini Regis apud Westm[onaste- 
rium] et tam valida sit in lege, 
sit ut dictus Jo[hannes] instalus prius restituatur per [illegible] et in posterum. 

Sir Jo[hn] Stanhope moved that Mr. Lively shod have the pardon 
shewed him : and deliver upon his credit whether he knew the hand. 

Mr. Lively the Bishop of Winchester his servant a member of the 
house' loked on it and aknoldged many of the interlinings to be the hand 
of the Bishop of Winchesters hand: and some part to be his owne hand. 

Coming to these words sayd 

Omnia crimina et errata, thats my Lords. 

8 A characteristic suggestion of Littleton's, which was accepted. Pym called attention also to the 
fact that more important business was in hand. True Relation (p. 49). 

•> Sherfield reported before Selden. See Nicholas (p. 132); True Relation (p. 49). 

' Edward Lyveley, esq., represented Berwick-on-Tweed Borough, Northumberland. Members of 
Parliament, i :476. 



180 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 7 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich. That Mr. Att[orney] shold be sent to 
agayne to know who putt these words into the pardon for eyther he did 
it him self or knew who did it.^ 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillips: that Mr. Att[omey] had told the Committee 
that the amendments were interlined before it came from the Bishop of 
Winchester. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott. I see here the indulgence and art of my Lord 
of Winchester. To respite this for the present : and make the disquisition 
of that part concerning Mr. Cosens:'' and then a Subcommittee to draw 
into a forme that matter which is here discussed. And then I hope we 
shal find this man fiitt to be presented to the Lords as a great cause of all 
our religous misery. 

Sir Daniell Norton: that a doctor being to attend the Bishop of 
Winchester when he had dispatched: the Bishop told him that he had 
used often to preach before King James: and use arguements to beate 
down popery: but now you must not doe soe: he sayd if he preached he 
would: the Bishop sayd he shod not. 

After the Bishop misliked the standing of Communion table: which 
stood as in an alehouse : the doctor sayd they were placed by Law : the 
Bishop said that ther were other injunctions which shold be of force : and 
asking the Bishop why in Winchester the table was sett up as an alter: 
the etc. This an offence to our pious King for the necessary understand- 
ing of the words must be that our Religion freed from Popery was 
defended by King James: but not now soe an injury to the present King. 
The doctors name was Dr. Moore. 

Sir Robert Phillips. The Bishop of Winchester hath a good will 
to make Durham and Winchester synonimas.^ 

A great Charge upon the King: as though he wotild not dare argue- 
ments for repellinge of Popery. Moved to send for Dr. Moore."" 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May. The Kings hart is as right sett for Religion 
as we cold wish, and as easy to reconcile all this house to the King." 

Sir Tho[mas] He ale and Sir John Cowper affirmed they h[e]ard 
Dr. Moore affirme soe much : and that he sayd he cold make it good upon 
his life.o 

The Speaker retvimed: Mr. Pym reported the particulers of the 
Bishops conference with Dr. Moore. Ordered : that Dr. Moore shold be sent 
for by a letter from Mr. Speaker to justify the words used by the Bishop. 

J See also True Relation (p. 50). 

^ Eliot as usual was trying to lead the House back to the main point. 
1 Neile, Bishop of Winchester, had formerly been Bishop of Durham. 
" Cf. Nicholas (p. 133); True Relation (p. 51). 
" Cf. True Relation (p. Si), 
o Heale was followed by Valentine. Nicholas (p. 133); True Relation (p. 52). 



February 9 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 181 



9: FEB. 

By Question patent for transportacion of marchants letters. Com- 
mitted Thursday Court of wards. 

Mr. Hack well: reported the election of Mr. Wynne for Flint. 

Complayent of 2 poynts: 1 for the imdue procuring of the writt. 2 that 
the writt was unduly executed. For the first: the resolucion: thus that 
the writt issuing after the death of Mr. Weanscoost was thought to be 
procured by Mr. Ogle from the Clerk of the Crown: that my Lord 
Keeper had notice gave directions and allowance. Mr. Williams of the 
Crown informed that these clerks claymed as a due and of use ancient to 
make out writts in tyme of Prorogacion of ther owne heads without 
direction of the Lord Keeper: that they had sometymes done it in tyme 
of adjomement. 

It was thought that in tyme of Prorogacion it was usefull for the com- 
monwealth to be done by the Lord Keeper: but inconvynient in tyme of 
adjomement. That the Clarks being commanded to bring ther presedents 
which they have done: 14 Eliz: a parlament continued till 23: during that 
tj'-me when any dyed they made out writts to the number of 46 during that 
tyme: in i° Jacob: they made downe 38 writts all without direction of 
the Lord Keeper: 18 Ja: during the adjomement, the Crowne office made 
out 2 writts. The Committee resolved nothing but left it to the resolucion 
of the house what to doe for the future: that for the present they con- 
ceived the writt was well enough issued forth.* 

Mr. Speaker: about the Atturney: that he received a letter from 
him: that he took notice of the intimacion from the house and presented 
to them a narracion in writing of the whole proceeding about Mr. Cosens 
words. ^ 

Sir John Eliott reported from the Committee about the marchants 
peticions concerning Sheriff e Acton: his examinacions, direct answeres, 
refusalls. That they knew not how to proceede: which when they took 
as an abuse, they commanded him to withdraw yet admitted him to a 
reexaminacion : when I proponded the danger if he still abused the Com- 
mittee in not dealing playnly with them: he gave little satisfaction: and 
after hee withdrew: the Committee resolved after they had thought of 
the dignity both of his place and this house, they resolved that he had 
abused the house in the Committee: and should answeare it here. 

Mr. Goodwyn: that the Sheriffe was sory that the Committee was 
nat satisfyed with his answere: he desired to be once agayne referred to 
the Committee: wher he woiild give a cleare answeare. 

February 9. 

-Cf. C.J. 1:927. 

*> For that narration, see Nicholas (p. 133). 



182 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 9 

Mr. Waller: love and feare in him did strive: yet his love to the 
Citty did put out his fear : moved to have him referred back to the Com- 
mittee. 

Mr. Long: that he was free from hight of love and fear: They live 
in a citty where he might have learned better civility: but he loved the 
honor of this house before the greatnes of the Citty. 

Sir Jo[hn] Coke: to have him referred. 

Mr. Vaughan: that the SheriflEe had confessed his prevaricacion and 
soe should be called into the house. 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May: not to be too hasty with him to insnare him. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott. This great officer was not snared suddenly: but 
with great caution in regard to the dignity of this house and that Citty, 
they gave him tyme upon a first and second question to have answered. 
The questions were but those about a replevin: the 1 question where he 
did falsef y : after he sayd he had bene with the Recorder he did deny that 
he had bene there. The next question when he had confessed he had bene 
at the Cort of Aldermen: being asked what counsell they gave him: hee 
denyed that hee had bene there. 

Resolved by question that SherifEe Acton shold bee sent for to the 
house. 

Sir Jo[hn] Coke justifyed the Sheriffe to have answered playnly and 
fully that he was cautious and declined to answere directly to such 
questions as might accuse himself: wished to consider what prejudice such 
a presedent might bring to the Kingdome hereafter. 

Great dispute whether he shold be sent for as a delinquent or not. 

Resolved that the Sheriffe shold be sent for in as a delinquent and soe 
soone as he did kneele, to be wished to stand up agayne: to be here 
to morrow mominge. 

Mr. Jones was called in with his counsell: to argue the validity or 
invalidity of Mountagues confirmacion. 

Dr. Steward and Dr. Talbott Civilians came to the Barr, to whom 
the Speaker delivered the cause of there comming. 

Dr. Steward first. 

We have received 2 orders here whereby we are assigned of coimsell 
with Jones: and to spek to it, this day. The questions are these: whether 
the exceptions exhibited by Jones agaynst the election of Mountague bee 
of validity. 2, whether these exceptions make a nullity of his confirmacion. 
These questions depend upon cases in law and devinity: and moved that 
what he spake might be taken as from one that came to speke for his 
clyent and not from his owne opinions. 

Legality: whether the matter contayned in the exceptions be such as 
being truely proved were legall. But this depends upon poynts in divinity 



February 9 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 183 

controverted not yet determined: if they be such as are erronious then he 
ought not to be admitted. 

2d poynt : whether these being legally propounded and expounded doe 
make the confirmacion voyd: it doth: 

A 3d question came into my mynd what effect wold come of it, if the 
confirmacion bee voyd: some may think that he hath lost his Bishoprick 
by it: but these are deceived: if it be nought it may be made better, for 
his right to election is good still, and he shal be sett in the same state that 
he was after his elecion and before confirmation. 

Dr. Talbott. The matter of Elections in the common law as they 
be copious soe they are intricate and are in this kingdome of little use. 

In the Canon law 2 kinds of objecting against confirmacion. 1 agaynst 
the forme: 2 the person. The subject of my discourse of the 2d: whereof 
I find 2 sorts, eyther objections of defects of the person as age, knowledge, 
birth-right : or crimes committed before the Election : by that Law those 
exceptions of Crimes were admittable agaynst the confirmacion: were 
such as were inter graviora delicta and make him incapable of the place 
to which he was elected. For the Articles, I doe not understand how far 
they will prove true: not having read the books of Moimtague: but if 
they shal prove inter graviora delicta in the opinion of this house then 
they are legall and to bee admitted. The forme of the Articles altho in 
Law they may be defective in some circimistantiall points yet in the sub- 
stantial! parts they are justifiable. For the tyme of propoimding them: 
I find that a publik Citacion being sent out to stimmon all persons who 
shal object agaynst the Bishop then Jon[e]s came, made his peticion, and 
desired to be admitted: and at that tyme he ought to come. 

2nd question: whether legall Exceptions put in and not admitted doe 
make a nullity: Ans[wer]: that he coming in in the due tyme and peti- 
cioning to be admitted to profe and being refused: in the last title of the 
Chap[ter] de electione: Pope Boniface finding that sudden elections was 
prejudicial to the Chiirch: and those neglected who wold oppose un- 
worthy persons, hee made this constitution that a publik Citacion shold 
goe forth to give notice: and if any confirmacion executed before such 
a tyme: it was to be of noe effect. <= If a Judge proced, to confirme, not- 
withstanding parties offering exceptions then it is voyd. 

21y: a constitucion of Justinian writing to the Archbishop of Con- 
stant [inople] how he wold have Bishops to be ordered: appoynteth if a 
Bishop be thought to be illegall and desire to be ordayned, and a Contra- 
dictor come in to oppose his ordinacion that he ought to be hard: and 

"Vocationem autem hujusmodi nominatim ubi est Coelectus, vel apparet oppositor, alias generaliter 
in Ecclesia, in qua electio facta est, ut si qui sint qui se velint opponere compareant assignato peremptorio 
termino cempetenti, faciendum esse censemus. Quare etiamsi electio in concordia celebrata fuerit, 
volumus observare." Corpus Juris Canoniic ed. (2 vols., Paris, 1687) 2:297. 



184 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 9 

if they goe on to the ordinacion without hearing: then the ordinacion 
was to be voyde si quis etc. : he read the words in Latine. And this con- 
stitucion seconded by Innodatius, a Canonist: yet with this exception 
that if the exceptions be Hkely to be true, then it is good agaynst the 
ordinacion and wher it is good agaynst the ordinacion, for the like reasons 
good agaynst Confirmacion. 

Last argument taken from Gratian in the Chapter illud: and the 4th 
Coimsell of Carthage Constitucion thus reads: when they came to ordeyne 
a Bishop and a Contradiction came; any cryme objected then, discretatur 
persona contradicentium: and if the Crimes prove true: they must not 
proceed to ordinacion. And tho that proved but uhi lex prohibet: and 
prescribes a written forme to be used, though the words be noe other of 
nullity yet the Law makes the procedings voyd : and concluded that this 
confirmacion of Montague was voyd. 

Sir Ro[bert] Phillips. I hard nothinge of one materiall question 
whether the not putting of an Advocates hand to the exceptions made 
them illegal or whether that being offered they cold refuse. 

Sir H[enry] Martyn: When an Election shall passe, without excep- 
tions : those exceptions can only reach to the confirmacion and not to the 
Election : but if afterwards they be proved legall : it works upon the Election 
alsoe. 

The Civilian Dr. Stewart called in agayne and by the Speaker 
demanded these questions. 

1 Question: whether the Advocates hand not being at the Articles 
were a sufficient cause to make to refuse the articles. 

Ans[wer]: It is not of the Essence^ nor noe good exception, that the 
Law maketh noe such constitution: but only an order made by the^ 
Court for conveyniencie. 

Sir H[enry] Martyn. The 2 d[octo]rs have spoken but mistaken 
this method: 1 the forme used in confirmacion: 2 how that agreable to 
acts of Pari [lament]: then how those acts are agreable to the Canon Law: 
then that practise agreable to this state: then the Idlenes of that 
Proclamation. 

Since 25 H. 8 save in Q[ueen] Maries tyme: we procede by a forme 
in confirmacions and swerved not from that forme: which is not agreable 
to the exact rules of the Common Law. There must be a Citacion set 
up at the Church wherto the Bishop is chosen else voyd. But 25 H. 8 is 
according to the Kings letters missive, if within 12 dayes the Dene and 
Chapter doe not choose the King may chose whom he will.*^ But if they 

1 but only crossed put. • 

s foynt crossed out. 

d "then the king may present by his letters patents without confirmation." Lowther 70. 



February 9 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 185 

doe chose their elections shal stand good to all intentions.^ And within 
20 dayes the Archbishop must consecrate him. Such ceremonies as may- 
be used in 20 dayes are retayned and noe more: these articles were 
tendered within 4 dayes of the 20: soe that within that tyme there cold 
not be any profe made. 1° Ed. 6^ such Ceremonies as Citacions and proc- 
lamacions are taken away and the King may make whom hee will.s 8° 
Eliz. the Parliament] took notice of some scandals that arose from these 
elections. 4 Conveynient to be as it is now.'' Objection] why doe you 
make this proclamacion to no purpose. Ans[wer] noe unusuall thing in al 
great actions to reserve some footsteps of antiquity tho not fitting to the 
present tyme : as that of the Kings Champion : of single or doble voucher. 

Qu[estion] whether this exception be legall: it is illegal secundum con- 
suetudiem illius curiae. If I had bene there: I would have asked Mr. Jones 
what he had to doe with Mr. Mountagues confirmacion : not being a shepe 
of that fold : he that will give a legall exception must have an interest : 
and ohligare se ad poenam} 3 parties in all judiciall busines. The Judge: 
the Acter : the Deane and Chapter : 3 parties dependant all of that Diocesse 
that will speak agaynst it. Question what if a good exception be given 
and the Judge will not allow it, doth this make the election voyd. 
Ans [wer] Noe. Nullities goe no further then where the Law doth fix them. 

There is noe great harme done, but what may be reformed: for the 
King hath power to thrust a Bishop that is erroneous in opinion out of 
his Bishoprick: and if these Exceptions bee proved they be sufficient to 
thrust him out of it.^ 

• "The parliament gave in that Statute the same authority to the King as was formerly in the popes," 
Nicholas (p. I3S). The incoherent sentence in Lowther needs to be rewritten as follows "And not[e] 
that what privilege the pope had before 24 Hen. VIII, the king had [been] given by act of parliament." 

• "Cap. 2°" added in True Relation (p. 54). See also Statutes of the Realm, 4:3-4. 

» Lowther adds something here but adds it in so confused and incoherent a fashion that it needs to 
be freely amended and interpreted as follows: [And when under Queen Mary, the acts of 25 H. VIII 
and I Ed. VI were repealed, the ceremonies as citations and proclamations were dropped as under 
Edward VI] and upon the presentation by the pope, there was no exception to be taken, and so contin- 
ued to Queen Elizabeth's time, which [usage] in i and 8 Eliz. was thought fit to be altered [in conse- 
quence of which, exceptions were pleaded again as by 25 H. VIII]. 

h Lowther 's difficult version of Marten must again be quoted: "the parliament in 25 Hen. VIII found 
what difference there was in cathedral churches by such exceptions; and therefore to put an end to such 
differences the king had this conferred upon him." This must mean that the King determined that 
the proclamations and exceptions should proceed not from the several cathedrals but from Bowe Church. 
To that practice the Elizabethan Church reverted, and it was of course more "conveynient." 

' "Such citation is not to be set but on the church where the bishop is to go . . . but those that 
are not of that fold they have nothing to do in it." Lowther 70. 

i Marten's speech, to be understood, needs to be read in all the versions and variants. What he 
meant was briefly this. The exceptions made by Jones are invalid because the whole ceremony goes 
back to a usage no longer current. Under the old usage the citations could be issued for the cathedral 
church over which the bishop was to be set, the proclamations would be made there, so that the "sheepe 
of this folde" could put in whatever exceptions they wished. With 25 H. VIII that was all changed. 
The proclamation is now made at Bowe Church and the request for objections or exceptions is merely a 
relic of an antiquated proceeding and has therefore no legal significance. Marten's complete statement 
as deduced from the several reporters is hard to follow because he tries to combine at once an argument 
and a complete historical exposition. 



186 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 10 



10 FEBR. 

1°. An Act to restreyn and to prevent some disorders in some minis- 
ters and some magistrates. 

2°. An Act for Confirmacion of letters patents graunted by King 
James to the governor and Company of the Citty of London for the plan- 
tacion of the Sommer ilands. Committed Thursday Star Chamber. 

Mr. Wild reported the Bill for the Explanacion of a statute of 3° Jacobi: 
intitled an act for the better discovery of Popish recusants." Passed 
to bee ingrossed. 

Mr. Rowles: acquainted the House that yesterday he was served with 
a Subpena out of the Star Chamber by a messenger of the Attumey: that 
hee told the man he was a Parlament man: he answered that if he wold 
not receive it he wold kepe it by him: Mr. Rolles sayd if he wold serve 
him he wold receive it which he did: that the Atturney wrote to him his 
man had mistaken: wished to read the letter. Sir Robert Phillips moved 
not to read it.'' 

Sir Robert Phillips. He was sory these rubbes are still given to 
our happy procedings: but being stirred we must follow it as that which 
concemes the universall liberty of all. There can be noe pleadinge of 
ignorance how this gentleman hath bene tumbled up and down agaynst 
privdedge: and an insolency not hard of to come to the Committee^ to 
serve him. If I thought this came from supreme command I shold be 
more humble but politike : if from Mr. Attumey my advice shold be more 
quick. Moved to send for this man: to know of liim from whom and 
when he had this and to make an example of any that shal thus scome 
and contume. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott, The happiness of the Kingdome consisteth in 
the preservacion of their Liberties and those are contracted in this house. 
Our Lenity causeth this violation: and our faire procedinge maketh our 
Liberties the Subject of scorne and contempt. This is unexampled but 
by one: when the members of this house are attached at the doore and 
carried away. The ground of this I conceive to procede from those who 
would take us of[f] the matter of Religion: it comes higher. Moved to 
send for this man to examine by whom procured: by whom sett on, who 
advysed to doe it at this tyme, to give such a judgment as may make a 
terrour to others.*' 

February 10. 

> After the word committee, Chamber is erased. 

» 3 Jac. cap. 4. C.J. (1:928) errs in making the statute one referring to recusants' lands. 

b Phelips's motion prevailed. True Relation (p. 55); C.J. 1:928. 

• Cf. Nicholas (p. 13S-36). 



February 10 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 187 

Mr. Alford. This was the day for Mr. Rowles appearance. Moved 
that the Bill'* might be looked into to see if the informacion were for any 
busines depending here. 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May sayd this came neyther by knowledge of King 
nor Counsell: but through some great error: wished till it were serched 
forth not to think that the state cast in any bone« to hinder valid pro- 
cedings. 

Mr. Selden. Observe the circumstances, never anything hapned of 
which we have [more] reason to take care: it was done upon him, a par- 
lament man, and upon many others who ought to have the priviledge 
of this House by following ther business here. Can this procede from 
an error when a member of this House and all that joyned with him in a 
business of soe great consequence as the like never was. It precedes 
from our owne negligence.^ To send presently for this man; and for all 
others who have affronted him. 

By question resolved that Mr. Rolles shold have his priveledge : 2 : that 
Nicholas Shrimpton shold be sent for presently to answer his contempt 
to this House. 3 that a select Committee shold be named with power 
to send for any: and to consider and examine this business: in afternoone: 
Treasury Chamber. ^ 

Ordered by question : that all Committees who have power to send for 
parties named shall have power in the name of the House to Command 
any persons whom they think fitt to attend the House at such tyme as 
they shall please. 

Ordered that the suppoena makers in the Starchamber shold presently 
be sent for to give account who appoynted them to make forth their 
suppoenas.*^ 

Sheriff Acton called in to answer his contempt at the Committee: 
kneled but being required to stand up, the Speker told them that he 
had at the Committee soe little respect that Committee, that he refused 
to give answer, made a frivolous answer, made contradictory answers, 
and had scornfully cast in a paper nothing to the purpose. He answered 
that he had noe intent to give any discontent but having forgotten 

<i i.e. the bill in the Star Chamber. 

e An allusion to Phelips's speech. Cf. True Relation (p. S5). 
' Cf. True Relation (p. 56). 

« For the members of this Committee, see C.J. 1:928. 

•> A comparison of True Relation, Nicholas, and Grosvenor with C.J. 1:928, for the paragraphs there 
numbered from one to six shows that no one of these three accounts is complete. 

I, in Nicholas and Grosvenor. 

2ly, in all three. 

3ly, in all three. 

4ly, in all three. 

sly, in Grosvenor only. 

61y, in Nicholas. True Relation has a special application to the merchants. 



188 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 10 

many things he could not answere directly: desired the good opinion of 
this House. 

Mr. Long : to send him to the Tower. 

Sir Fran[cis1 Seymer. He believed that he erred of ignorance not 
of wilfulnes: moved he shold acknowledge his fault: and with an admoni- 
tion to be dismissed.' 

Sir Dudley Digges. A great punishment to appear on his knees 
here : had hee confessed his fault ingeniously : but since he came with an 
Ip he cold not allow it to call him in agayne : but to proceede agaynst him. 

Mr. Coriton. To commit him to the Serjant till he had made his 
submission. 

Mr. Selden: thought that he that durst soe affront a Committee, 
regarded noe more to kneele here then sitt upon his stoole at home. Let 
not our mercy undoe our selves. I remember when 2 sheriffs of London 
were committed to the Tower for lesse offense then this. In 37 H. 8 a 
member arrested and sent to the Counter: the serjant of the House goes 
to the Sheriff: and told them what they had done and demanded the 
prisoner: they gave the serjants ill words, they were sent for hither to 
the Barr: the playntiffs sent to Newgate: the serjant to little Ease: the 
sheriffs to the Tower.'' 

Sir Rob[ert] Mansfield. Not to deal so extremely: this sheriff 
offended of ignorance: you see how many wayes he hath convayed his 
sorrow to this House, he hath bene on his knees: let him acknowledge 
his fatdt and bee admonished. 

Sir He[nry] Mildmay. We are upon a great business, the censuring 
of a great officer of a great and opulent City for prevaricating with a Com- 
mittee. We all know how many there are who watch for occasion to 
breed distraction betwixt the King and his Parlaments. The Sheriffe 
desired, that if there were any further thing required from him to give 
satisfaction: it will be thought that it is not for this offence: but for other 
secret causes concerning his Carriage in the other great busines: moved 
to call him in agayne etc. 

Mr. Kyrton. That he had promised the Sheriff all favour:^ but now if 
his Brother were in the sheriffs place he shold to the Tower: we nede not 
feare any rascallity report to the King: nor nede to feare our own justice. 

Sir Jo[hn] Maynard. When he considers the fault singly : he would 
have him sent to the Tower : but when he considers his posture of humility : 
that the word if came out of his mouth by chance : 

' According to the True Relation (p. 56), Seymour moved that the sheriff's case should be referred 
back to the Committee and if he did not deal clearly he should be punished. 

i As reported in the True Relation (p. 56), Acton's words were: "if he hath offended or erred" etc. 

^ See Holinshed, Chronicles (London, 1808), 3:824-25. This case belongs to the 33rd not the 37th year 
of Henry VIII. The mistake was probably Selden 's for Nicholas also makes him name the 37th year. 

<C/. True Relation (p. 57)- 



February 10 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 189 

1 to ask him questions. 2 to let him kneele and acknowledge his 
fault. 3 to admonish him strictly to deter others. 

Mr. Littleton. If great fines and punishments have bene inflicted 
for offenses agaynst Pari [lament] mens servants: how much more an offence 
agaynst a Committee. Shal wee feare bad reports of bad men, it is our 
misery to be misreported but lett the mischiefe light on their owne heads: 
let us goe with our Consciences: and censure him.™ 

Sir H[umphrey] May. God grant mee ever eloquence in the way of 
moderacion not of severity: this man did err with feare with carefulnes 
who he might offend. If we rest here we shal be famous for our mercy: 
else for our rigours. 

Sir Jo[hn] Stanhope. The arguments used and put into the ballance 
are so good, grayve and waighty ; and the contrary arguments soe light that 
he sayd not chaffe : that he wished to put to the question. 

Sir Miles Fleetwood: layed ignorance, and hastiness of disposicion 
to the Sheriffe : for mercy : to forbeare the Tower. 

Sir Tho[mas] German. The sense of this House comes upon 2 
consideracions : 1 whether he shal be sent to the Tower : 2 to call him in 
and heare what satisfaction he will make. The first is too hasty a Con- 
clusion: soe to bring him in hether. A 3rd way: his submission here will 
give noe satisfaction to the Committee: to send him to them agayne: 
if he satisfye not there then to send him to the Tower. 

Sir E. Price. We have indured the liberty of tongues, if we neglect 
this cause we shal have the violence of hands. To send him to the Tower: 
we will neyther hang, draw nor quarter him: and if to morrow he peticion 
and submitt himself: then to shew him mercy. 

Sir Ralph Hopton: for mercy. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillips. In Tacitus of a man observed to qualify the 
ruged censures of the Senate: and he was held a man of wisdome:butI 
follow the example of one in Tacitus who finding the usurpacions of the 
Romans, prayed them to remember the honor of themself and there pos- 
teryty and ancestors. Let it not bee sayd that our mercy hath destroyed 
our justice: by punishing him we shal doe a kindnes to his children here- 
. after. For the Tower. 

By question ordered that Sheriffe Acton for his abuse to the Committee 
shold be sent to the Tower: he was called in and upon his knees 
received his judgment from the Speaker." 

-° Cf. True Relation (p. 57)- 

"" Grosvenor omits several orders of the day. See C.J. 1:928, True Relation (p. 57), and Nicholas 
(p- 137). 



190 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 11 



FEBR. 11 

1." An Act for reversing a decree in Chancery: and assurances there- 
upon made by Sir Th[omas] Germy knight etc." 

Mr. Speaker moved in behalf of the Chancelor of the Duchy: that 
in regard of the necessary attendance the later end of the tearme that he 
might have Monday to attend : which was ordered. 

Sir Robert Harley presented the Bill agaynst Citacions upon 
common fame. 

1.° It was read. 

2° An Act for increase of trade. This was Ingrossed for the Lords. 
Committed^ Monday : Starchamber. 

Mr. Selden: Reported the priviledge of the House broken in Mr. 
Rowles case: being served into the Starchamber that the process was 
taken out by examinacion of the Clerks, that on Fryday last Mr. Roper 
came to the Clerk with a warrant subscribed by Mr. Aturney: in the 
ordinary way: for taking out the processe: the Lord Keeper told them 
they must bee despatched and returned this tearme: that they were 
delivered on Sunday mominge. Upon Monday night there was sent a dis- 
charge by the Attiimey to Mr. Rolles : that being a Parlament man he was 
not to appeare during the Parliament] nor the dayes of priviledge. The 
Bill came in on Monday, and finding it doth expresse in the preamble 
his Majesties dede [?] to Customers: the procedings in the Exchequer: a 
combinacion agaynst the geting forth the Replevins: a narracion of the 
Kings right to take the same. 

It was read in the House." 

To morrow was appoynted to consider of this as an incident of tunnage 
and pondage. 

Ordered"* that the Committee for the marchants business shold prepare 
so much for a report as is tuched in this bill which they have examined: 
and to have broght in alsoe anie of, the Informacions made in the 
Exchequer agaynst marchants for timnage in poynt of law there having 
bene 100 informations since King James tyme: which will ly there for 
after tymes to the prejudice of the subject, and to strengthen the Kings 
title. 

Upon Mr. Pryces mocion it was ordered that all the members of the 
House shall attend the House and none to goe out of towne without leave 
first asked in the House after 9 of the Clock: upon sensure of the House. 

February 11. 

» See CJ. 1:928. 

*> For members of the committee see C.J. 2:928-29. 

<• See Nicholas (p. 137). and True Relation (p. 57) for the substance of this bill. 

<• Upon Selden 's motion. True Relation (p. 58). 



February 11 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 191 

Sir Ed [ward] Coke was ordered to bee sent for.® 

Mr. Pym in the Chayre: for Religion. 

Mr. Waller: We first began to lay downe the truth we professed 
which I hope we shal mentayne: then we complayned of underminings 
of Religion which we professed by Jesuits and Arminians: we have in 
the discussion found out some who labor to introduce Popery. For Ar- 
minians tyme to inquire into sermons: and books: and countenancing. 
One reason, the stop of such books as are written in answer are stopped, 
and others suffered to be printed. And he presented a peticion from the 
Printers* wherein the Bishop of London hath licensed books tending 
to Popery: and Arminianisme : and denyed those agaynst it: and if they 
print without licence they are punished by the High Commission.^ 

The printers called in and 3 justifyed the peticion : to be by the consent 
of all whose hands were to it: many of whom were alsoe prosecuted as 
they had bene. Mr. Pym asked them what particular orthodox books 
were restrayned. One of them sayd that he had offered Conflicts and 
comforts of Conscience,^ Babell noe Bethell,^ Lewis his Legacy,'^ Golden Spur 
to the Celestiall race,'^ wherein they made him crosseout: that a man could 
be certen of salvacion: by Mr. Turner chaplin to the Bishop of London: 
about a month [?] [blurredY the last Session. That he printed God noe 
Imposture:^ and Prins Against Drunkenness that he was threatened for 
it and his books taken for it. 228 Books of Prins taken from him. 7 Ser- 
mons by Bishop Andrewes of Chester. "^ Sermon in the moimt: printed by 
him, he imprisoned. 225 of them taken from him. By warrant from the 

1 Following this is written and then crossed out: Sir Miles Fleetwood: not to consider of this at this 
tyme: but to proceed. 

^ probably after. 

e At the beginning of the session a motion had been passed that "in respect of Sir Edward Coke's 
great age, and absence . . . another may be named for the Chair for the Committee of Grievances" 
(C.J. 1:921). In spite of his seventy-six years Coke had dominated the House during the stormy session 
of 1628. Now as their difficulties increased the members realized their need of his leadership. According 
to the True Relation, Coke was to be written to by the Speaker; but, according to the Journal (1:929), 
by his son Clement who was a member of the House. 

* For the names of the printers see Nicholas (p. 138). 

B By Henry Burton; printed by Michael Sparke, who is evidently the witness. See Cal. St. P. Dam. 
1628-29, p. 364. 

h By the same author. 

' This work we have been unable to identify; probably it was never printed. 
' This also was probably never printed. 

^ God noe Imposter nor Deluder. London 1629. 

• This was probably Prynne's Healthes Sickness, or a compenduous and briefe discourse proving the 
drinking and pledging of Healths to be sinful and utterly unlawful unto Christians. London 1628. 

™ This was undoubtedly the book first published in 1592 under the title The Wonderfull Combate {for 
God's Clorie and man's Salvation) belweene Christ and Satan, opened in seven most excellent learned and 
zealous Sermons, upon the Temptations of Christ in the wilderness. There seems to have been some trouble 
about publishing at that time. The sermons were republished in 1627, evidently not without difficulty 
See Bishop Andrewes's Minor Works (Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology, Ojiford 1854) Appendix B. 



192 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 11 

Councell. The Bayiinge of the Popes Bull:°- for printing of that he was 
forced to fly.*' 

A Subcommittee named to consider of the Printers peticion. To 
morrow Court of Wards. p 

Mr. Sherville reported about the 4 pardons: who soUicited and 
who procured the Kings hand. 

The Subcommittee have examined five witnesses: Mr. Allison: Law- 
ton: servant to the Bishop Winchester: Harris a clerk of Sir R. Wolseles 
office: and Baldwin. 

Sibthorpe and Cosens pardons : Allison declared that hee by the direc- 
tion of Mr. Atturney having ingrossed the pardon that Sibthorpe sol- 
licited the prosecution of his pardon, and delivered it to him and sayd he 
wold carry it to the Bishop of Winchester for his hand: whom he sayd 
had gotten the Kings hand to the other of Manwaring and Mountague. 
Blackstone sayd that he came to Mr. Allison for Cosens pardon: and 
carried it to the Bishop of Winchester: who asked why the Kings hand 
was not to it: who answered that he wold carrie it to the Bishop of Win- 
chester: a speciall frend of his. He left the pardon with the Bishop: and 
coming for it agayne he sent him to the signett office: where he had it 
under the privy scale: and Baldwyn thence to the great scale. Lawton 
sayd: that Bishop of Winchester delivered him Cosens and Sibthorps 
pardon to him to bring to the signett office : that the Bishop sent word to 
Mr. Gall of the signett office: that he gott the Kings hand. 

The pardon of Montague : Harris a Gierke sayth that he borrowed the 
Bill signed to prepare it for the greate scale before they had the privy 
scale for dispatch : and upon that bill it was entred that Winchester gott 
the Kings hand. 

Manwarings pardon: Baldwin was desired to sue out his pardon: 
coming to the signett office with the drawn bill signed was stayed there 
because he cold not tell who had procured the Kings hand: he went to 
Allison who told him that Bishop of Winchester got the Kings hand. 

Harris sayd that he borrowed the bill signed for Dr. Manwarings 
pardon: and beleveth that the Bishop of Winchester [s] name was indorsed 
to have gotten the Kings hand. 

Mr. Allured: remembered that at the Committee Blackstone con- 
fessed that the draughts of the pardons were ready before the Atturney 
had any warrant at all. 

Mr. Cromwell: related from the mouth of Dr. Beard: concerning a 
sermon he preached by way of rehersall at Spittle when Winchester was 

" By Henry Burton. In the B. M. Catalogue this is marked "London [?] 1627," but it must have 
been printed there for it appears in the Stationers Register for 26 April, 1627 (4:142). 

o Cf. Nicholas (p. 138-39)- 

p Selden had moved "that a law may be made on this" (True Relation p. 59). Evidently his 
motion was rejected and instead the whole matter was referred to a select committee. 



February 11 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 193 

of Lincolne. He was to reherse Dr. Alablasters sermon: who had uttered 
somewhat that he conceived to be Popery. Winchester sent for him, 
and charged him not to deHver anything by way of opposicion agaynst 
Dr. Alablaster: by virtue of his canonicall obeydience. He went to Dr. 
Felton Bishop of Ely and^ charged him, though he was not his Diocesan: 
yet he charged him as a minister to oppose it: which Dr. Beard did: and 
was sent for by Neale, and was exceedingly rated for what he had done.' 

Mr. Sherland: spake much unto the Credit of Dr. Beard: as an 
orthodox man. 

Sir Robert Phillips. Dr. Marshall had the same conference he 
had with Dr. Moore :^ about the same tyme: to persuade him to not to 
preach agaynst Popery. 

Sir Jo[hn] Jephson: that he had hard it from Bryers: and Gadston: 
who were ordered to be sent for to the Committee. 

Mr. Kirton: that Dr. Marshall might be sent for: to justify that the 
Bishop where he skips over Bishopricks he would leave a style of Popery 
behind him. 

Sir Robert Crane: informed that Cosens when he was of Caius 
Colledge at the tyme of receiving the Communion was reading on a booke : 
which had to title A Preparative to the Masse. 

Mr. Waller: that Cosens came to the printing house and put of [f] of 
the book of Common Prayer: the word Elect* and for minister put in Priest." 

Sir Miles Fleetwood: that he saw yesternight one of the books 
of Common Prayer lately printed: which they call Mr. Cosens booke. 

Sir Miles Fleetwood: we do all labor to vindicate Religion and 
the Church from those disturbances : we are f alen upon 2 : Roman Catholiks 
and Arminian Sectaryes: in this later: we have made a solemne vote: 
now to fal into consideracion of the person and matters that hath bene 
the occasion of this stir. The person is Mr. Mountague: the matters in 
3 heads. 1 for scisme and error in doctryne. 2 sedition in poynt of 
state: ' 3 an agravation resulting out of these 2. 

1. His Scisme: the fondacion drawne from his books. His answer 
to the Gag:"" Appeal to Cesar:"" Invocation to Saints."^ In these are 

t who conveys better the meaning. 

•■ This is Cromwell's first recorded speech in the House of Commons, and the only one known before 
Nov. 9, 1640. That it is so fully recorded in all three accounts is significant. 

8 This must mean, Dr. Marshall had the same kind of conference as he (Beard) had, and so had Dr. 
Moore. Cf. True Relation (p. 59), and Nicholas (p. 139). 

*Cf. Nicholas (p. 139-40). 

" Nicholas (p. 140), follows this with a resolution ordering Richardson, Heath, and Thomas Wryte 
to be sent for to give testimony against Cosens. 

■' Matthew Kellison's A Gag for the New Gospel was answered by Montagu's A New Gag for an old 
Goose, London 1624. 

^ Appello Caesarem, a just Appeale from two unjust Informers, London 1625. 

» Montagu brought out in 1624 Immediate Addresse unto God alone, first delivered in a Sermon before 
his Majestie at Windesore, since revised and inlarged to a just treatise of Invocation of Saints. 



194 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 12 

doctrines repugnant to the Articles of our Church: wherein he hath 
offended agaynst the Law. 

2. He hath introduced doctrines and supersticions of the Roman 
Church. He hath pubHshed that the Roman Church remayns firme upon 
the fundacion of the doctrines by Christ. " 

3. Derogated from the Church of England by scandalous speches 
agaynst worthy Doctors of our and reformed Churches^ and spoken 
scandalous spech of prechinge etc. 

Hee hath published many passages to the dishonor of King James 
who was ever desirous to stop these errors. 

2. That when noe place for sanctuary for protestants to repaire but 
here, he hath brought a faction which doth us much hiu"t. He hath cast 
puritan upon the Kings best subjects to bring them into jelosies with 
the King. These divisions have soe distracted men that even they are 
much wavered: that now it is generally spoken of the Arminians: and 
Catholicks: may grow much to the danger to the Kingdome. Last his 
pardon: seek to be and think to be restored to the purity of our religion. 

Mr. Pym remembered one Dr. Lindsey lately made Deane of Lich- 
field Chaplin to Winchester who mentayned falling from Grace.** 

Mr. Waller named Dr. Gifford for an Arminian. 

Sir Walter Earle named Bishop White.""^ 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich moved for a subcommittee to bring what had 
bene in dispute into order : for a report : either matters of fact : or reasons 
concerning Religion. <=•= 

FEB. 12 

Upon my motion ; it was ordered that Ed : Greg, and Rob : Gregg shold 
be sent for to be here upon Monday Sevennight to answere there Contempt 
in executing there patent for being Commisioners in all Commisions 
issuing forth of the Exchequer at Chester: after it had bene condemned 
in the house. 

2.° An Act for the enabling of Edward Hamond for sellinge some lands 
for the paying of his debts and preferment of his children in Essex. 
Committee : Monday. Court of Wards. 

y The reference is perhaps to this passage in The Appeale to Caesar (p. 113); "The Church of Rome is 
a true though not a sound church of Christ, as well since as before the Council of Trent; a part of the 
Catholic, though not the Catholic Church." 

'■ Montagu in many places spoke slightingly of Calvin. He refers to the Puritans on one occasion 
{Appeale, 72) as "the Party of a Faction that hath so long had a Schisme on foot against it, to bring 
in Genevanism into Church and State, wholly, totally, were it possible." 

»» Whitacre's speech recorded by Nicholas must have followed Pym's. This was Laurence Whitacre 
best known for his diary of the Long Parliament. 

bb C/. True Relation (p. 60). 

<"= Upon the speaker's resuming the chair Pym reported from the grand Committee of Religion and the 
House resolved that letters should be sent to Dr. Beard and Dr. Marshall to come to the House and 
testify against the Bishop of Winchester. C.J. 1:929. 



February 12 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 195 

Sheriffe Acton was called in, being brought by the Livetenant from 
the Tower: and at the Bar upon his knees: the Speaker told him that 
upon this his submission the house was pleased to release him from his 
imprisonment: yet soe as they had referred him downe to the Committee; 
where they expected he shold answere playnly and fully that he incurre 
not the further censure of the house. 

He desired the house to forgive him his offence : he desired there good 
opinion and to take him into there favour. 

Tunnage and Pondage 

Sir John Eliott reported soe much from the Committee of the 
marchants busines as conduced to Timnage and Pondage, as the seiz- 
ing of the goods, the imprisonment : denyed Justice : but this wold require 
dispute: and left of, 

Soe much as concemeth the pretended legall procedinge in this Case. 

1. A Commision 26 Jul. 2 Carl R.* wherin divers things observable. 
It is granted to the Lord Trestirer: Commisioners for Trestu-y: Barons 
of Exchequer: Customers and officers of the Ports and Customhouse. 
In this Commision the grant takes notice, that it was not granted by 
Par[Hament] but had bene thought upon'' and cold not be perfected: 
yet directs that those dutyes shold be collected and tendered till by 
Pari [lament ] it may bee settled. 

Next: noe authority to wage, but to levy; and to commit all persons 
who shall disobey: and to kepe in prison till they conforme and pay: and 
upon this they first grounded there procedinge. 

Next thing; a grant or farme to Sir Pal. Pynder: Sir John Worstam: 
Ab. Dawes: and others 13th Mar. 3° Jaicobi]:" this granted for two 
thousand pounds disbursed to the Kinge. 

Another grant 31 Dec. 4 Car. for a yeare to begin at Christmas next. 
After the first patent in that tyme comes all the questions. The Cus- 
tomers by this patent when the marchants exported ther goods in severall 
bottoms, they demanded tunnage and pondage. The marchants sought 
by Law to redresse themselves : and Mr. Rolles and others took a Replevin 
out of Chancery: upon that the Customers to prevent execucion went to 
Mr. Atturney: he to the Exchequer: there the Customers made an 
affidavit: that when they understud a Replevin brought, they say that 
those goods are in the Kings Storhouse layd up for the Kings use, and were 

February 12. 

» Rushworth (1:641) cites the King's letters patents dated 26 Junii 2 Caroli which "by the advice of 
his Privy-Council, did declare his Will and Pleasure to be, that Subsidies, Customs, and Impost should 
be levied in such Manner as they were in the Time of King James, until it might receive a settling by Par- 
liament." It is evidently this same Commission which was read on the 20th. See Grosvenor (p. 226), 
True Relation (p. 86). 

•> Cf. Rushworth, 1:413- 

" This should read Caroli. 



196 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 12 

retayned by warrant of the Kings privy seale : and they stayed them only 
for the Kings use: and had noe other right: this begott an order reciting 
the Affidavit, and sayd that it was the usuall course of that Court in al 
things concerninge the Kings revenue to stay all suits in other courts: 
and that noe ministers imployed about his revenue to be sued in other 
courts: and that it was not seasonable thus to be determined but fitt to 
be setled by Parliament]. It was ordered that the sheriffs shold not 
make delivery of any goods upon that or the like writt: that the Sheriffs 
shold continue the Customers in possession of the goods and the marchants 
had only to shew cause to the contrary. 13<^ No[vember] 4 Char, an 
order. The marchants were hard by there Counsell that begott another 
order : reciting the former procedings and concludes, that the marchants 
shold not have the goods nor sue elsewhere: soe they were bound up. 
30 Jan: another Replevin taken by Mr. Chambers out of the Sheriffs 
Court: Mr. Atturney made a motion in Exchequer where a new order 
for stay: soe they could have noe justice and now they come to this house 
for Justice. 

Ordered that the Commisions, orders and all such procedings in the 
Exchequer shold be read in the Committee for Tunnage and Pondage: 
and there to be considered of. 

The Grand Committee for Tunnage and Pondage 
Mr. Sherfield in the Chaire 

Mr. Waller: as an Incident and a groundwork preferred a peticion 
from Mr. Chambers: Mr. Fockes, and Gelman marchants which was read 
by the Clerk: that wheras they had complayned of the Customers for 
detayning there goods, that 9 day of Feb[ruary] when a Committee was 
about the busines, they were served to appeare in the Star Chamber to 
answere in a short tyme: moved to have the busines spedely examined: 
and some course to be taken for ther goods. 

The peticion referred to the House. ^ 

Mr. Selden: to consider (thinking of the Sheriffs and Customers 
and Exchequer Acts) to seek out a course in this narrow tyme of the 
Tearme how to right the marchants. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott. These men have some of them 7000£ of goods 
others 5000£^ detayned: which hinders both there and the Kings profitt: 
that they cannot drive a trade with soe great a stock. Moved to think 
of some Cotirse to bring them to the possession of ther goods from 
which they are kept by a pretended legall course. The Exchequer the 
Rub: there orders brought on by motion of the Atturney: and he by the 

d This is given as Nov. 27 in Nicholas (p. 141). 

• For the resolution of the House, see Nicholas (p. 141). 

'C/. Nicholas (p. 141). 



February 12 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 197 

affidavitt of Customers: the order sayth they stay those goods for duties* 
to the King and noe other interest: wheras it appeareth they had an 
interest by the Kings grant: having farmed it: and they expressed at 
the Committee that they meant the subsidy of Tunnage and Pondage :•» 
I conceive that if the Barons if they understud this they would give way 
to ther relefe. Moved for a message to the Exchequer to open these 
things to the Barons and to move them to retract this error by them done. 

Mr. Wansford: fitt to right the marchants: for we are all wounded 
in them: yet for the way I would not have this house move any thing in 
vayne: If the Judges give us not satisfaction are noe nearer our ends or 
the marchants there goods. 

He hoped that if we proceeded temperately there wold be a course 
taken to repayre this wound by removing and cancelling all Records and 
such orders as prejudiceth us. 

Mr. Coriton: for restitucion.' 

Mr. Kyrton: it is agreable to Course of Parliament] to send to a 
Court of Justice with our opinions : the affidavit sayth for duties they ex- 
pressing ther meaning to be Tunnage : to send to the Judges and therby 
we shall try ther Justice: and if they doe it not: we know what to doe. 

Mr. Strode: 1, necessary the marchants shold be restored to ther 
goods before we give them away : for fitt they shold know ther owne before 
they give it away. 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May: that he hard from Mr. Coriton a word of ill 
Counsellors which word may make a bad impression. J Mr. Chambers 
was the first man who denyed this duty: he was sent for before the 
Counsell: ther mayne end was to bring this question peaceably to this 
house: never Counsell proceded so mildly with a man. That he refused to 
pay them because they were not due. That he had payd them before in his 
owne wrong and wold pay them noe further. We desired him not to stir 
this question but to leave it entire to the Par[liament]. He sayd noe 
but if the Pari [lament] gave it he would: we promised him if the Pari [la- 
ment] did not give it we wold repay it: we told him the Kings wants. 
I will not tell you his high words yet for which he was Committed: we 
went legall wayes; and when you examine the [Ex] Chequer Cources you 
will say they did it legally: and if I had bene in the Duchy: I wold have 

E By duties is here meant the old customs which belonged to the King by common law. 

h As was made clear by Eliot's report the grants, or leases, to the farmers were based on the Commission 
of July 26, 1626 which was for the receiving of Tonnage and Poundage. Eliot's point is that if they can 
maintain that the goods were held for Tonnage and Poundage, then they can insist that the men held 
them as farmers and so they can be prosecuted in the courts as they could not if they had acted as the 
King's agents. Nicholas is clearer here than Grosvenor. 

' Both Nicholas and True Relation give this speech. Nicholas leaves out the criticism of the King 
and his "wicked ministers." 

J Grosvenor omits May's thinly veiled allusion to the possibility of a dissolution of Parliament. See 
True Relation (p. 6i). 



198 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 12 

kept the King in possession till evicted by Law: as in private custom 
of Common [Law] wher possession hath bene. The Interruptions given 
were so combustible as enough to [have] fired this house and the Kingdome. 

Sir Tho[mas] Edmonds. I have hard to griefe with what strong 
sense this house apprehendes the course taken with marchants about the 
taking of the ancient duties of tunnage and pondage: I declare ther 
ingenuity of my hart without strayning to defend an unjustifiable matter. 
I am sory of the mistaking of his Majesties intention to take this as his 
right of inheritance, but since this question was to bee determined in this 
house shortly why shold these few violent men oppose that quiet pro- 
ceding. We all would think [ourselves] hardly used to have our posses- 
sions taken from us lite pendente: we all know the benefitt of the peticion 
of right, which was hardly gotten in regard of his Majesties jelessy lest 
it trench upon his Prerogative for which ther is due great thanks: 21y 
that we use it not to an excessive liberty. On the marchants part it was 
scandalum acceptum not [illegible]. And now since his Majestic had so 
clerly expressed himself for the interest of the Subject: to bring this Parla- 
ment to a happy conclusion which will much depend upon the content 
his Majestic shal receive in our happy, moderate procedings. 

Mr. Coriton explained himself of the word wicked Counsellors that 
the wicked Counsellor must be taken from before the King, wee are Coun- 
sellors to the King. Lett us speak here as if we never speake more, yet 
we may speake together in heaven, that is like honest men: and not be 
discoraged. 

Sir Jo[hn] Stanhope moved that Sir Th[omas] Edmonds might 
expresse that word of excessive Liberty; which he did: that he meant the 
unnecessary stirring of this question. 

Mr. Waller. The sole of the Commonwealth ReHgion: the body 
is the Entercource betwixt man and man: ther is obstruction in the 
Liver: which suffers the blood from free passage. The Customers have 
abused the King in his Custome and Revenue, and are the cause of the 
Stop of trade and it is not the marchants: for it is not these few but 500 
more that are discontented. Trade upholds the King and Kingdome as 
wel as by the Plow: this fitt to bee cherished: the procedings in the ex- 
chequer stops this procedinge. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillips. Consider the busines, 2 the waies of pro- 
ceding. The busines into 3 parts. 1 the Detention of the Marchants 
goods; 2 the obstruction in a court of justice put upon the mar [chants] 
in the way of recovering ther goods. 3. injury done to the Kingdom 
and this house and then the informacion of Starr Chamber. Moved: to 
resolve upon debate to sum up together those particiilars spoken of to 
form a declaration of the Injury done: to informe the King that contrary 
to his owne declaracion, a bill in Starchamber to clayme it as due. Fitt 



February 12 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 199 

to have the goods restored: which will be honorable to the King and 
quicken our affections. 

Mr. Noy: The hindering of the marchants from ther goods is the 
hindring of tunnage and pondage. They are the greatest hinderers of 
this Tunnage who have labored to take it whether men will or noe. 

An ancient Duety, and noe inheritance are words I understand not: 
while I give it is a duty: after not: If I offer another man a gifte, which 
he taketh as his owne before, I deceive him. 

Tunnage granted to King James diiring his life: since when divers 
inf ormacions of offenses done contra formam statute : I never knew that 
statute: but it is grounded upon that of 1.° King James :'' some Judgments 
have bene given upon those informacions but where ther hath bene any 
opposicion, ther hath bene noe judgments: and we must remove these 
which will be evidences in after tymes: till these be removed we cannot 
grant: for it will be rather a coniirmacion : and till then I wold not grant 
it: for I wold neyther be deceived nor deceive him to whom I grant it: 
as they doe that tell him of his right: fit to goe on with the busines, but 
to expresse in the bill that it is noe inheritance, but a free gifte to remove 
all those obstacles and declare the right of the subject : if they that must 
have it will take it as we can grant it, it is well: if not we cannot help it. 

Mr. Selden, liked not to goe to Bill before this and many other things 
were rectifyed : and the informacions and judgments upon record, that these 
are due by act of Pari [lament]. 4 Courts have it upon record that it is 
the Kings already: what shold we troble ourselves for that which is his 
already. The asking of his owne is noe excessive liberty. Moved for a 
message to the Barons that wheras such men had sworne before them 
that the marchants had refused duetyes; which the Customers had de- 
livered before us that they meant tunnage: they wold eyther beleve ther 
testimony before us, or send for them: and if they find it soe to alter ther 
order, etc. 

Mr. Sollicitor: liked not sending to the Exchequer, it would bee to 
the dishonour and the quiet of the house, for if any rule be given in any 
Court : they will presently fly hither for remedy : moved that by a usuall 
way by Counsell they may be moved to alter ther order. 

Sir Euball Thelwall: from this house in 18 Ja. a message sent 
to the Court of Chancery by the Erie of Dorset, that in the Case betwixt 
Sir WilHam Pope and Sir Ge[orge] Marshall that the Court wold proceed 
noe further. It was obeyed and they proceded noe further.^ 

Mr. Glanville. Those objections are upon us by record to be 
removed. Acts spek more strongly then words and protestacions : to 

^ 2 Jac. cap. 33. Tonnage and Poundage had been granted for James's lifetime. 

' See Proceeding and Debates of the House of Commons in 1620 and 1621 (Oxford, 1766), 1:340-44, 364- 



200 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 12 

say it is a free gifte and yet to take it by act without grant will be judged 
by the acts in tymes after: take this of first. The most wary meanes to 
preserve the honor of the King and of the Judges with our owne. Judges 
have 2 capacities of knowledge. Judiciall and extrajudicial, the first in 
ther courts: 2 out of ther courts. H. 4 put to his chef Justice: If a judge 
see a man kill one: and the Jiu-y find another gilty: he must give judgment 
of that but reprieve the other for mercy. ™ 

Mr. Littleton: noe Judge in the Kingdome will aver the right in 
the Eling. I wold nether goe to the King nor to a Bill. If we goe to the 
Barons: eyther they wil tell us that the matter of right they question not: 
but for possession the King hath the right of other subjects and if in the 
Kings possession, we must goe by a mannerly way, by peticion: but 4 Ed. 
4 and 7° Sir Thomas Littleton: a Judge: I am indebted to a man by bond: 
the King commands me to pay that money. I ow[e] another to him. I 
doe so, yet he shal have remedy agaynst me. Not fitt to give, till we 
know what to give. To send to the Barons. 

Mr. Noy. That the marchants shold be appoynted to make a mocion 
to morrow before the Barons by ther Counsell: that they wold declare 
what duties are to be payd that they wold pay them.° 

Sir Jo[hn] Coke. The grounds upon which we goe is upon this 
affidavit: which we say was meant by tunnage and pondage: to examine 
this whether the ground be true or not. 

Mr. Godfrey: that further note that Tunnage and pondage is not 
due till it be granted by Act of Parlament. 

By question resolved to send a message to the Court of Exchequer 
by some members of the House. 

Mr. Selden: Mr. Littleton, Mr. Glanville, Mr. Noy named to drawe 
the forme of the message unto the Court of Exchequer presently in the 
Committee Chamber: and to returne it. 

Sir Dudley Diggs. To consider that all the miserys that have 
falen upon us in this Kingdome hath bene since the dispute in this busines: 
other subsedies are degenerated: the benefitt comes from the power sent, 

™ Lowther (p. 70) summarizes the committee discussion without giving names but evidently depends 
chiefly upon Glanville. "Wherein is taken into dispute, touching the bill of tonnage and poundage, with 
all the incidents unto it: and therein as an incident the judgment to stay the execution of a replevin 
for the delivery of the goods, and also the information in the Star Chamber against the merchants sitting 
the parliament. For the first the Judges have two capacities, one judicial, another extra-judicial. We 
know the common case: the Judge seeth one man kill another and the jury findeth another; the judge 
being asked what he would do in this case, who answered he might give judgment according as the jury 
found, but he would move the king to pardon him; who much commended the uprightness of the law. 
And this case in the Exchequer: here was an affidavit true in one respect but false in another, but they 
gave their judgment according to the matter before them. The words were, that the customers took 
it for duties due to the king, which might be true and false. But when we send to them to inform 
them truly it may be reversed, and then the replevin may have its proceedings, for they have now 
declared that those duties were intended for tonnage and poundage, which cannot be any duty due, but 
there might be some old customs which might be said duties." 

° See Nicholas fp. 143-441, for a clearer statement of Noy's point. 



February 12 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 201 

the rich are eased: that from marchants came from the rich: from what is 
exported: it is from those who have to sell: if imported from the marchants, 
who are rich men. Since this stop such an interruption of trade. Ships 
ly Idle the stock idle: mariners idle. If these men be restored, if the 
records be taken of[f], will not that make his Majestic [s] jealesie great 
and make necessary him to use his power and [illegible] upon us. 

Sir Jo[hn] Coke. Till this busines be setled our Coasts are un- 
guarded: OMT ships not at sea. Was glad to have soe good expression of 
gen [era ]1 harm. 

Mr. Browne. The strength of the King in the harts of his subjects. 
They doe the King the greatest disservice that persuade the King to take 
that agaynst the good will of the Subjects]: which they are willing to 
give in a legal course. A Ciu-se upon all such as shall infringe the Liberty 
of the Subject. 

Sir Dudley Diggs. In this busines I moved in 18 [James] that 
those things shold not be^ passed over. I moved that all the ports might 
farme ther owne Customes.° Whatever we give of our standinge reve- 
nue, can doe no good except the Charge be regulated: and that can not 
be done but by parlament : and not to give to private purses which can 
never prosper. 

The 4 gent[lemen] returned with the message which they had con- 
cluded of. It was read. 

The Message 

Wheras upon an Affidavit made in the Exchequer the last michalmas 
by Sir J[ohn] Worsham, Abram Dawes and Richard Carmarthen, a coppy 
whereof is hereimto annexed at the motion of his Majesties atturney gen- 
erall it was by that Court in the bill then ordered that John Rolles in the 
[blank] shold not fur [ther] procede in the replevin according to which alsoe 
and upon the said grounds an other order likewise annexed made by this 
Court in this Hillary tearme [illegible] who secured like remedy for wools 
likewise seazed [blank] And wheras the Commons House of Par[liament] 
upon examinacion of the matter of which complaynts by authority [blank] 
What they meant in the affidavit by those words the Kings duties have 
every of them declared that they were tunnage and po[undage] and other 
duties in the book of rates. 

This House hath therefore tho[t] fitt that a message be sent wherby 
notice may be given [blank] that soe the Court [blank] 

The expeditinge wherof this case doth much conceme the advance- 
ment of his Majesties service. 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May, Sir Robert Phellips, Sir Nat[haniel] Rich, Sir 
Fr[ancis] Cottington named to be sent with this message to the Barons. 

1 pardoned, crossed out. 

° For sir Dudley's motion and its reception in the house see Proceedings and Debates of the House of 
Commons in 1620 and 1621, 2:iS4-SS; also Harl. 7208, S. 171-171 verso; Add. 26,637. f- 100 verso. 



202 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 13 



13 FEBR. 

Ordered that I* shold give intimaton to Mr. Radcliffe, and Mr, Whi- 
bie that the house expects there attendance here. 

An Act for the setlinge and estabHshing Sundrich the manor of Kent 
to Thomas Browker agaynst a patent of concealment lately granted Georg.** 

Mr. Pym: moved that the peticion agaynst Mr. Burgesse vicar of 
Whitby might be reasumed and 4 new articles agaynst him preferred 
drawne: one that he reported he could not gett a copie of the articles 
agaynst him till such tyme as he procured a frend to counterfett himself 
a Puritane and then gott them: 2. that reading the Canons sayd that the 
Puritans were greater Traytors then Campion" or Harding,^ that cominge 
by a parishioners house, and hearing them sing psalms: kep a yelling, and 
scoffed at that holy exercise. 

Ordered that he shold be sent for to answere : all referred to the Com- 
mittee of Grevances. 

Sir John Eliott. The marchants move, that this day being there 
day of apparance in Starchamber, that since they ought to have ther 
priviledge, that ther may be an intimacion to the officers of Starchamber 
that they incur no danger of attachment for not appearance. These are 
Mr. Rolles of this House: Chambers: Fowkes, Gelman. 

Mr. Selden. There case is this: that these marchants were served 
with a suppoena at such tyme as they attended the Committee about 
a Complaynt of the same matter for which they complayned to the 
House. Moved that an order be made for ther priviledge, and this 
shewed to the officers of Starchamber. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich. That privelidge for ther persons was due: 
but for the suite although he cold not determine it for the present yet 
he inclined that in this case it was due: wished to refer it to a Committee. 

Ordered that Mr. Rowles shold have priviledge, and all the rest Mr. 
Chambers, Fowkes and Gelman shold have priviledge for their persons. 
And Phillips: the Sheriffs officer. The other part whether priviledges be 
to be graunted from suits brought agaynst them.® 

Ordered that ther shold be a significacion given to the Lord Keeper 
that these 4 in regard of the priveledge granted them by the House are 
not to have any attachment taken out against them. 

February 13. 

» "Intimation to be given by Sir Richard Grosvenor unto Mr. Ratcliffe and Mr. Whitby for their 
attendance here." C.J. 1:929- 

b George Fowch. C.J. 1:929- 

Edmund Campion the famous Jesuit executed in 1581- 

<i Thomas Harding, a champion of the Roman Church during Elizabeth's reign and noteworthy for 
his controversies with Bishop Jewel. 

e A committee was appointed to consider what privilege be granted to Petitioners. True Relation 
(p. 63); C.J. 1:929. 



February 13 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 203 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May reported: that they had according to command 
bene with the Lord Treasurer: and found with him all the Barons but 
Baron Vernon: and told them that in the discussion of Tunnage they 
found a stop to be some orders and injunction of the Court for stay of 
goods. Ther answer that the busines was serious, that they wold take it 
into consideracion : and with speed retm'ne such an answer as became them. 

Sir He[nry] Mildmay moved to goe to the matter of Religion: and 
let not that be taken up with other matters.* 

Sir Dan[iel] Norton acquainted the house that Dr. More was 
attending at the doore : who was sent for up to witness agaynst the Bishop 
of Winchester. 

Dr. More called in: and at the Barr being demanded by the Speaker 
what Conference the Bishop of Winchester had with him about his preach- 
inge: Dr. More desired that he might answer to Interogatives more free 
from exceptions, confessed that the Monday after Dr. Lamb dyed^ he 
had conference with the Bishop, that taking advise whether he shold goe 
to him hearing that he meant to question him about a sermon. I went: 
and found with him the Bishop of Ely that now is: when he came first 
he told him that he came to present his duty to him: he told me he hoped 
I had brought a Coppy of my sermon. I hoped he wold not have called 
for it. He sayd that better to give it then to be wrung from me. I have 
learned from Sir Huston aut a nobis aut de nobis. You have pleased King 
James with some pretty passages agaynst Papists but you must not preach 
soe now. I had bene related to the King as though I preached his actions 
weak and childish: and the Dukes action at Isle de Reeinconsidera[ble]. 
The Bishop told him his brother preached agaynst the high Alter. The 
Com[munion] Table stood before like a Table in an Alehouse: I sayd as 
it was appoynted by Statute. He sayd : that Statute was repeled in Q [ueen] 
Maries tyme. I said it was restored in Q[ueen] EHzabeths tyme. The 
Bishop: The Queues Injunctions hath the force of Ecclesiasticall Consti- 
tucions which he sayd gave command to sett the table as alters: this is 
an inlett to many superstitions. 

Sir Tho[mas] Hoby: That he shold be called in: and asked what 
he meant by those inletts to superstitions: being called in he answered: 
that in Winchester he was an ey[e] witnes of some things. The seats in 
the Qmre were taken out of the quire. And an order brought that at the 
singing of gloria patri every man injoyned to stand: for which noe law 
canon nor constitution. Great Candlesticks brought in, higher then 
I am: those used by Queen Mary when maried to King Phillip. An 

' According to True Relation, at this point in the proceedings Secretary Coke was ordered to 
notify London and Westminster about the Fast. 

t This must be Dr. John Lambe, astrologer and admirer of Buckingham, who was killed by the mob 
on June 13. 1628. 



204 



COMMONS DEBATES FOR 162Q 



February 13 



injunction that Candlesticks shold be abolished: this to out-face the 
Communion table. A Cross made upon the table, and napkins in his 
own house: and obeysance made to it: but this concerneth a particular: 
Dr. Theodor Price; made severall crosses: at the foote of one a Cup of 
Sacke, Ale, other march beare. Ale, Beare and Clearitt> 

Dr. More to deliver his testimony in writing. 

The House resolved into the Committee of Religion 
Mr. Pym in the Chaire 

Sir William Bulstrode. Was the finding of a Babilonish garment 
soe great as cold not be reconciled till the thing executed without the law : 
and that the Babilonish garment of Rome. The Court infected. Mas 
there.' To move the King that none of his owne kingdome of that Religion 
to tend in Court. 

Citacions James I 

tyme six weeks 

former procla[mation] 7 July 

trust in promises 

what good hath this our Zeale brought to religion^ 

It is read. 

Sir Ro[bert] Phill[ips]: spoke of the encrease of trators beyond 
Seas : from 2 to 40 popish seminaries.'' 

We have special charges at Wisbech,^ but no good Courts. 

Moved that the Clerk look up all peticions of Religion : and then bring 
them that with these addicions that wee shall find cause we may frame 
such an humble peticion to shew him noe way of safety to him till we be 
reconciled to God : that there is never a Jesuiticall Papist in England but 
is a more fast Subject to Spayne then England. "^ 

Sir Jo[hn] Maynerd. An old proverb when a mans neighbors houses 
are fired: tyme to look to ourselves. In Scotland: Papists very insolent 
favored by the perpetuall Sheriff. They were punished by the magistrats. 
His Majestic gave them thanks for it. 



^ Cf. Nicholas (p. 144). Lowther gives Moore's relation as follows: "That he [Moore] going to him 
[the Bishop of Winchester] after some conference had said that he (the bishop] had heard him [Moore] 
preach some pretty things against papists in King James his time, but he must not do so now. That you 
[Moore] have a brother that preacheth against bowing at the name of Jesus and the altar. For changing 
the communion table, which he commanded, for he said that the table before stood like a table in an ale- 
house. In private houses crosses used by napkins and profaning it by setting cups of wine, beer, ale, 
at every corner." 

' Nicholas (p. 144) and True Relation (p. 64), elaborate on the masses at court. 

J These isolated phrases — beginning with "Citacions James I" — are evidently Grosvenor's notes 
of his own speech. See his speech as recorded in detail in True Relation (p. 65-69)- 

^ i.e. the number has increased from two to forty. Nicholas (p. 145). 

1 Wisbech Castle, where recusants were confined. 

™ Grosvenor's notes of Phelips's speech are poor, perhaps because he had just sat down after giving 
his long report. Cf. Nicholas (p. 14s) and True Relation (p. 69-70). True Relation follows this speech 
with one by Coryton. 



4 



February 13 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 205 

Sir Jo[hn] Hotham: That the Atturney had written letters into 
Yorkshire for stay of procedings: moved they shold be brought in. 

Mr. Long: Hee that is not warme at hart in this quarrell: is a very 
coward: we have bene like seamen, have bene far of[f] at first we must 
grapple: and come nere. Within 3 or 4 dayes after the Lord Keepers 
Declaracion were preists released. 2 things: 1 a narracion of the state 
of Popery. 2 The Countenancers of them to procede agaynst. 

Mr. Selden: To procede thus: to goe on with these particulars: 
and determine of that particular first : and so proceed to the rest : 

1 : that there were priests at Newgate one arrened ; and in respect of 
some defect in him who tooke evidence: was found not gilty. One was 
condemned: these 10 priests came not thither as priests from severall 
places taken: but they had begim a colledge in England and soe were to 
settle themselves as members of a monestery, that they wanted little of 
conclusion : the name of the house : Domus Prohationis etc : who ever 
encouraged them, may be fond out : etc. 

In Ireland as many monesteries and houses as beyond sea. 

Sir Dudley Diggs: we have had good answers: but till particulars 
open his Majesties judgment, we are not likely to have particular remedy. 
4 archbishops in Ireland : for every bishop they have over 800 clergy men : 
imprisonment at Wisbech dangerous." 

Sir Jo[hn] Coke: that a discovery" was made by some ministers of 
State: that evident marks of a Colledge: as reliks of Ignatius and others: 
at Clerkenwell. His Majestic took it to hart: commanded me to represent 
it to the Consell board, and that they shud proceed according to Justice: 
the particulars were digested into order: the legall proceedings to Mr. 
Atturney : to send the priests to Newgate : then to proceed. The Atturney 
recommended it to some Justices of Peace: what hath been done since I 
know not. 

Sir Fr[ancis] Darcy: at Newgate there were 5 Judges: these priests 
first 3 broght : one condemned : other 2 clered : then the rest were brought 
in being about 10: the oath presented to them: they desired tyme: but the 
oath being shewed them: they refused. The next sessions was expected 
these men shold be called agayne : but came not they were bayled : but by 
whose meanes he knew not. 

Mr. Littleton: to send for Mr. Long a Justice of Middelsex, he is 
likest to give fuU satisfaction. 

° i.e. dangerous to the state. 

o For the story of this discovery see Discovery of the Jesuits' College at Clerkenwell in March 1627-8 
(Camden Misc. vol. 2) and Supplementary Note to the Discovery of the Jesuits' College at Clerkenwell (Camden 
Misc. vol. 4). 



206 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 14 

Some gentlemen were sent from the Committee to Newgate and Mr. 
Long to see all the warrants^ etc. 

FEBR. 14 

A peticion from Alexander Burgesse agaynst the Lord Lambard* a 
deputy Livetenant for imprisoning him in the Stocks from 8 till 9m for 
refusing to pay a tax'' layd upon him and others since the last session. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: that the Lord Lambard may be sent for to give 
his attendance here: and to answer this complaynt. 

Sir Ri [chard] Buller undertook that he shold be here the next weeke 
if he came not this day: but the house resolved by question to send for 
him to answer the complaynt. 

Mr. Pym : moved that 

The pace of Justice to bee ordinary swete and slowe; yet severe. Not 
to send for him but to give Sir R. Buller, to give him notice. 

Sir Jo[hn] Hippesley desired leave of the house to goe to the Lords 
to answer a complaynt made agaynst him : but the house having formerly 
ordered he shod not goe up upon payn of exp\ilsion'= wold not suffer him. 
For"^ a member of this house ought not to be punished by the Lords : but 
by his peers in this house. 

Sir R[obert] Phillips: not to let him goe. 

1 An argument of lightnes, when after soe positive an order. 

2 the generall interest of our right for till 18 Ja: a Commoner was 
never questioned or judged by the Lords. ^ 

3 from the probable disservice it wold doe our members: for the 
reason of priviledge is that we might wholy sett our mynds upon the service 
of this house. Moved to lett this order stand :f then to name a Com- 
mittee to consider of our right: and to go to the Lords to challenge the 
same etc.^ 

P Mr. Long was examined on this same day (True Relation, p. 71; Nicholas, p. 146), Secretary 
Coke was called upon for the further explanation. Cross the pursuivant was examined, and Sir Thomas 
Hobby and others v/ere appointed to inquire further into the matter. True Relation (p. 71-72). 

February 14. 

» Lambert. True Relation (p. 72); C.J. 1:930; Grosvenor (p. 212). 

b The tax was "4d towards a maintenance of a Serjeant to train the bands." C.J. 1:930. 

<: Jan. 29. C.J. 1:924; Nicholas (p. 115). 

^ Selden is speaking here. Cf. Nicholas (p. 146). 

« For the proceedings in 1621 see Proceedings and Debates of the House of Commons in 1620 and 1621, 
1:176-78; C.J. 1:557-558. The conclusion to which the House came at that time was "that those of our 
House that will go to take their oaths in the business preferred to their Lordships, may go voluntarily, 
if they will; but are not to go by compulsion either from the Lords or this House." Cf. Add. 26,637 fi. 
34 verso-35; Harl. 7207, ff. 282-85 verso. 

' This order is given only in True Relation (p. 72). 

K In this debate Phelips was followed by Strode (Nicholas, p. 147), May, and Secretary Coke (True 
Relation, p. 72-73). 



February 14 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 207 



By question ordered that a Subcommittee shold be named^ to con- 
sider of this question whether a Commoner bee to be questioned, and 
judged by the Lords House.' Monday: Starchamber. 

Secretary Cooke: reported: that a proclamacion is ready about the 
fast: and the booke instantly to be ready for the forme. 

Sir H[umphrey] May: tendered an answer to the former message 
concerning the marchants goods detayned: from the Lord Treasiirer and 
Barons, i 

Mr. Selden: by this answere we are Httle nearer to gett the mar- 
chants ther goods. Moved for a committee to take this answere, and the 
orders of this Court; and to examine them whether there be any such 
constant course in that Court: as to supersede replevins in the Kings case.'' 

Ordered that a select Committee be named to take this case into con- 
sideration super totam materiam: and to search what is the constant 
course of the Court. This afternoon: In the Exchequer. 

Sir Dan[iel] Norton: delivered in writing from Dr. More the sub- 
stance of what he had sayd agaynst the Bishop of Winchester.^ 
Mr. Pym in the Chair e 
Grand Committee for Religion 

Sir Tho[mas] Hobby reported: what the Committee sent to Newgate 
had done: that they had demanded the warrants by which the Priests 
were committed: he"" told us that by warrant of Mr. Atturney they were 
broght to the Sessions: that 3 of them were indicted: for priests: Moore 
condemned other 2 [ac]quitted: that Moore was reprieved: and received 
an order from Mr. Recorder the night before the execucion seconded with 
an order from Lord Chief e Justice of the Kings Bench to stay execucion. 
That the oath of Alledgeance was tendered the rest: that the Earle of 
Dorset told the Keeper it was his Majesties pleasure to have them de- 
livered: and a warrant from the Atturney: that they were bayled: and 
bond to answer within 20 dayes at the Consell table after warning. 

The severall warrants read. 

Sir Fra[ncis] Seymor. I see diverse priests released from direc- 
tion of the King expressed by the Lord Dorsett: he saw no direction from 
the King to Dorsett, moved that the Consell shold know from the King 
whether it was his pleasure." 

^ For the names see C.J. 1:930. 

' "whether the Lords may receive a complaint and give judgment against any Commoner, unless he 
be first questioned and transferred from the House of Commons." Lowther 71. 

J Grosvenor took no notes on the answer because it was a separate he could buy. See above (p. I73)' 
For the separate see True Relation (p. 73-74). 

k Selden was followed by Phelips. Nicholas (p. 147). 

I For other orders passed by the House see Nicholas (p. 147-48); True Relation (p. 74); C.J. 1:930. 

■" The reference is to James the keeper of Newgate. Nicholas (p. 148), True Relation (p. 74)- 

o Sir Nathaniel Rich seconded this motion. True Relation (p. 75). 



208 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 14 

Mr. Coriton. That these things shold not bee: Dorsett and atturney 
appeare to be the men: to procede with them. 

Sir R[obert] Phillips: to examine it thoroughly and when we come 
to the bottom then to present it to the King fiilly. 

Sir John Coke : presented the papers found with the priests at Clerk- 
enwell:° that he had digested them: and read them. 

Father Banks: rector of the colledge taken there. 

1 By the Inventory of roomes 

2 by the accoimts of receipts 

3 by ther orders for government. 

They have all matters fitt for masse; a seller of wynes: beare: com- 
mon porter: 

S : O : there stuff marked with, 
there pewter with : S.J: 

They have a Jornall or Clerk of the kitchens book for disbursements 
and expenses. 

21y a contracted account in Latine taken and allowed by Father 
Banks rector. 

An Account of all Receipts and disbursements 227-13 -2d receipts: 
the disbursements are the same. 

1624: in Dec: they left Edmonton, went to Camberwell wher they 
stayed 20 months. The accounts there of expenses — 137-1-5. 
Totals: 346-18-1 
Accounts of both houses : 

ex censu fundationis 294£ 

logers 75£ 

429 
574 

exposita 205-1-3 

ex elemosyna 250 

restat in pecunia 160£ 

parata 
Status rerum corporalitum domus prohationis S[anc]ti Ignatii Soci- 
etatis Jesu. 

This is the name of the house. 

From Camberwell they came to Clerkenwell: about Jan: was twelve 
months. 

3. orders for ther government. 

1. a generall direction from the superior in 13 heads. 

° "Upon January last Humphrey Crosse gave intelligence to me how that great provision was carried 
into a house where nobody dwelt. And upon warrant to search the house they found one Laythome who 
pretended to be the keeper of the house for the Earl of Shrewsbury, and they found therein vaults and 
cellars in lurking places." Lowther 71. 



February 14 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 209 

2. a speciall direction from the provincial! congregacion held 
1625 : and this in 8 directions. 

3. Special direction to the m[aste]r of the novices of this society 
in 6 orders. 

4. directions for the minister of the Society in 3 orders. 

5. observacions for all the society. 

6. directions in 6 heads to the Rector: and to the Superior: the 
Rector is Stanhope: the same with Banks. 

In 10 heads the faculties granted to this society. 

That the Bishop of Rome hath set the Bishop of Calcedon over the 
clergy of England. 

Directions in what manner they shold answer any questions about 
goinge to Church etc. 

A list of all the Jesuitts in the province. 

Ther practise ther agaynst this State: they wrote letters to others to 
dissuade the taking the oath : 

The SodaHty of the imaculat conception of our Lady: to be observed. 
This in little booke. 

They disperse lying miracles as by 2 letters. 

Directions to all Jesuits March 20 
- to say a masse upon that day 
to commend to God a busines of great moment. 

That the purpose here to make a head: a Cataloge of al Recusants 
who had gotten houses neare the colledge.p 

Upon the first discovery: I acquainted the King he to the board: they 
required this abstract : and the papers to be digested, sent to Mr. Attumey 
to procede agaynst them. 

The Atttu-ney recommended this matter to Mr. Long: he not so able 
as he shold: The issue before the Judges whether priests or not: the 
examinacions were short. 

But here appers an other issue whether these men had contracted a 
house depending upon the Pope. Moved that Mr. Longe called to answer 
what informacion he gave the Judges. 

Sir William Bulstrod: moved that Mr. Secretary might discover 
whether the Erl of Dorsett who was soe forward to release these priests 
was acquainted with these papers. ^ 

Sir Tho[mas] Hoby: that Mr. Attumey might shewe to this house 
what warrant the Erl of Dorset brought him for deliverance of the 

p This report which Secretary Coke read in the House had been "prepared by him for the Councell 
Boarde" (Nicholas p. 148), as evidence to prove that the men arrested at Clerkenwell were "Jesuits and 
priests as appears by their books, reliques, copes, their founders ..." (Lowther 71). 

1 According to Nicholas (p. 148), the part of Coke's report given above beginning "The issue before 
the Judges," was in answer to Bulstrod's request. 



210 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 14 

prisoners: If he took his word: that was dangerous: to release such men 
without special warrant. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich: reported that Crosse was able to say much: 
that the examinacions to prove them priests were detayned at the try all. 

Crosse the Pursevant was called in: and demanded the issue of the 
tryall: and whether any examinacion was withheld: he sayd that the 
papers were in Mr. Longes hand, and Mr. Longe never read them nor 
shewed them forth : he moved that Long wold produce them : and that they 
might be read: he nodded at him and sayd nothing. 

Mr. Selden: at the Sessions ther were 10. 3 areyned; oath of alledge- 
ance to the rest : evidence only for being Priests : 

Queue: what was the reason that these men shold be indicted only for 
being Priests for that was the way to free them. There is expresse testi- 
mony in the papers that they were Jesuits; but none at all that they were 
priests.' 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymor: that the King discontented : Religion went so 
bacward that eyther that he wanted power, or had ill counsell given.* 
Mr. Attiirney hath erred in judgment if not in affection. We see how 
carefull the King is: and the ministers in the Country: notwithstanding 
which care: after commissions to inquire: letters from the Atturney to 
stay proceedings in the Kings name. Mr. Attiu-ney hath put this busi- 
nes of [f] from himself to Mr. Longe a man unfitt: moved to make a per- 
fect inquisicion.* 

Cross called in agayne: being asked sayd that Mr. Atturney sent the 
papers by him to Mr. Longe: who bad him returne with them agayne to 
Mr. Atturney for his hand writing else he wold doe nothing. That the 
Att[orney] gave him a warrant and directions to have a care of this 
busines : that the Clerk of the Peace drew the Indictment by Longes direc- 
tions. That one of this company was discharged out of the new prison: 
that the Keeper told him it was by order of the Lords of Counsell." 

One Walker the Clerk of the Peace for Middlesex was called in and 
demanded what warrant Mr. Longe gave him for the drawing of the 
Indictment: he sayd that he had non[e] for it was drawn in London not 
in Middlesex. 

Sir Dudley Diggs. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: acknowledged thanks to Mr. Secretary for his 
discovery. Here is a groundworke to a new religion and for such as 

f Selden was followed by Coryton. Nicholas (p. 149). 

a The reference is to the King's answer to the Commons Apology about Tonnage, etc. "As for the 
cause of delay of my business being Religion, there is none of you shall have a greater care foj the true 
preservation of it than myself: which, since it is confessed by your Answer, you must either think I want 
power (which cannot be) or that I am very ill-counselled." True Relation (p. 32). 

tC/. Nicholas (p. 149); True Relation (p. 76). 

u Cf. True Relation (p. 76). 



February 14 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 211 

acknowledge a forein power: this discovered: what cold be the purpose 
of those who interposed thus for them;"^ but to give them power to execute 
ther purpose in some other place. The persons I loke at are 2. 1 the At- 
turney : of whom we heare often : and in this Cause of Religion : when he , 
saw this cause brought to him, by direction of the King and Counsell : yet 
in a cause soe much concerns King, Religion, pollicy: he withdraws him- 
self committs it to an other, from whom it cold not bee expected he shold 
be soe exquesite. And commission in the Attorney as well as omission. 

Next named the Earle of Dorsett interposeth with the Atturney: and 
for reprieve of the men.: for I hope that the King did not contenance his 
first direction: but this mans hand too deepe in this busines.^ 

Moved: that Mr. Recorder ^ be sent to enquire from him who gave him 
direction for reprivall of the priest condemned. Noe man were he an Arthor 
or Allodius^ can find a means to vent his malice soe much to this State as 
by protecting these men. 

Sir Jo[hn] Finch:** moved that the Recorder shold not be sent for:'''' 
but some members sent to him: from whom they shal be sure to receive 
a fitting answere: and noe man from whom such kind of peple can 
expect lesse favour. 

Sir H[enry] Martyn sent to him and Sir Dudley Diggs.'=° 

By question resolved to send to Mr. Atturney to know whether he 
received from the Counsell a direction to procede according to the Instruc- 
tion in those papers: whether he did proceede: what instructions he gave 
Mr. Longe: and then concerning the Bayle: by what authority. And why 
he bound them to appeare before the Counsell table: and why he had 
not acquanted his Majestic that these men were not bayled by law, if 
he received directions to bayle them. 

Serjant Hoskins. To ask the Atturney why he gave direcion to 
indicte these as priests: the only way to have them escape. 

Another question: seeing the priests had piirchased lands: why he 
took not care to search out this land for the King.^^^ 

Sir Fra[ncis] Seymor: Sir Robert Pye: Sir Walter Earle, sent to the 
Atturney. 

V Cf. True Relation (p. 77)- 

^ Cf. Nicholas (p. 149); True Relation (p. 77). 

y Sir Heneage Finch. 

' This must refer to the Alveidae, sons of Iphemedria by Poseidon. 
• » Speaker of the House. 

'>'' Because he had "formerly had the honour to sit in the Chair" (True Relation, p. 77). He was 
Speaker in 1626. 

<=« "Sir Jo[hn] Elliot," Nicholas (p. 149). 

<i<i Nicholas (p. 149-50) and True Relation (p. 78) give additional evidence on the Clerkenwell case. 



212 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 16 

FEB. 16. 

A Peticion from Mr. Hilton of Westmorland that he was found to be a 
Recusant by Sir Jo[hn] Saviles Commission* being a protestant. Mr. 
Hilton called in to justify his peticion. 

Sir Pet[er] Reddall. This Commission the greatest cause of the 
growth of recusants: that John Richardson the Clerk of this Commission 
beinge now in towne shold bee ordered to stay here: and to bring his books 
with him. 

A Committee named wherein my self one'' to take into Consideration 
this peticion and commission for compounding with Recusants with all 
such as shold be presented of like nature : with power to send for witnesses 
and Records: Thursday: Exchequer Court. 

The Lord Lambert was come up, and took notice of the peticion agaynst 
him for setting a man in stocks for refusing to pay a grante [asjsessed by 
him to bee payd for musters : he desired a coppy of the peticion and tyme 
to answer it particularly which was granted. 

A peticion delivered by Thomas Mansell of Grayes Inne gent[leman] 
and John Brown of middle Temple about a great Estate" left by word 
from [blank] Brown: which was distributed by Sir H[enry] Martyn: who 
reserved 6000£ for pious uses. 

This was referred to the Committee for Courts of Justice: yet first 
that they wold have him speak in the house before they proceeded. 

Sir Jo[hn] Coke: that he had hard Sir H[enry] Martyn have much 
honor in London for this busines. That he had disposed much to pious 
uses. 

Sir William Becher: that he had disposed the whole 6000£: for 
being moved for soe much to a pious use, hee gave some, and sayd if you 
had come sooner you shold have had more. 

Sir H[enry] Martyn: that when he had read the Peticion, hee would 
give a present answere, and if in this they find him not as cleare as S[aint] 
John Baptist, then to think him as bad as Judas. This matter is worthy 
your examinacion: for if I shold be such a man as is expressed in this 
peticion: I were unworthy to be kept in my place: being known beyond 
sea as well as any Judge in England. 

This Browne a young man unmarried dyed intestate: had many 
kinred. I intreated the Lord Camden who had bene m[aste]r to Browne, 
Mr. Bateman,*^ and Crashaw to take care of this Estate lock it up: and 

February 16. 

» A commission for compounding with recusants in several northern counties. See Cal. St. P. Dom. 
1628-29, p. 205. 

b For the names of the members of the committee see C.J. 1:930. 

" "50,ooo£," Lowther 71. 

<i "the Chamberlyne of London," Nicholas (p. 150). 



February 16 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 213 

make an Inventory. They underwent this service, and dealt faithfully: 
when the accounts v/ere made I drew the kinred together. They prayed 
me, that before I wold settle administracion I wold make a division. Was 
affirmed: that Browne sayd before his death: I wold have John Browne 
to have 7000£: and 16000£ to the kinred and good uses: by consent 
he ordered that Browne shod have 14000£, the kinred 10000£ and 6000£ 
to pious uses. Then I considered who shold be administrators. This 
Browne deceased had a sister: and was the next of kin. Yet was not will- 
ing to have Mrs. Maxwell administrator being an old, sick woman: and 
Gardner an aged man, a foole. I made choise of Mr. Gardners sonne* 
to bee administrator: without any respect to myself; but to have the 
estate well managed. Of this 6000£ I have distributed 3500£ : the rest 
Mr. Gardner: the accounts are in the prerogative Court to a penny, by 
the same token I lost 25£ by it. All that I have forth of the estate is: 
a little plush for a paire of breeches : a chayre and stoole : and a Cabinett, 
which I wished to have for my money: but have not yet payd for it. As 
alsoe I gott for the Duke of Buckingham a fantasticall piece of plate: the 
world in a globe; upheld by an Atlas: this to my Lord of Buckingham 
for which they are never payd, nor never shal bee. 

The Peticion referred to the Committee of Coiu-ts of Justice.^ 
Grand Committee for Religion 
Mr. Pym in the Chayre 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich presented a peticion agaynst some insolences 
done by some papists. 

from William Brestree^ 
Ric: Conquest 

At the reading of the Peticion it was observed that the house was 
termed the lower house of Parl[iament] which was disliked: and sent 
to the peticioners to be corrected. 

Sir H[enry] Martyn: reported: the message to Mr. Recorder about 
staying the execucion of Moore the priest: he sayd that he had given noe 
such order for stay: that the Keeper of Newgate came to Sir H[enry] 
Martyn to excuse himself for wronging this house in saying the Recorder 
had stayed him: he had mistaken. Thence we went to the Lord Chef 
Justice: to know by what warrant he stayed the Execucion of Moore: 
who sayd it was his Majesties Command by word of mouth to him 
immediately.'' 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillips moved that James shold not escape, for bely- 
ing the Recorder to this house : but to be punished. 

« "Mr. Tho. Gardner of the Temple," Nicholas (p. 151). 

' At Marten's entreaty. Nicholas (p. 151). 

e Boldstreete. Nicholas (p. 151). 

h Cf. Nicholas (p. 151); True Relation (p. 78). 



214 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 16 

James called in : and confessed his mistakinge : that he had noe warrant 
or intimacion from Mr. Recorder. But he was urged by Mr. Pym: to 
answere: upon whose order he made stay of provisions of [illegible] for 
the execucion. He sayd that the reprieve came to him upon Sunday in 
the afternoone: the day before the execucion. 

Ordered that James shod wayte the pleasure of the Committee: and 
to acknowledge at the Bar his fait and after to goe give satisfaction to 
the Recorder for injury in this. 

Mr. Strode : that the Lord Chief Justice shold be proceeded with for 
soe reprieving the priest upon the Kings bare word. 

Sir H[umphrey] May: that it is usual to reprieve upon the Kings 
command: it was ordered in Starchamber that they shold proceede to 
condemnacion of priests: and then to send them to Wisbech.' 

Sir Robert Phil[ips]: that this was dangerous to have the Star- 
chamber make an order for the Stop of lawes in execucion; that it had been 
fitt for the Lord Chief Justice to have opened to the King that this man 
was not an ordinary priest to proceede agaynst. 

Sir Jo [hn] Coke. That there was a declaracion of the Kings pleasure 
in the Starchamber : only noe order. 

Sir John Stanhope: when Kings assemble Parliament] they give 
themselves to there counsell. We are the great inquisitors of the King- 
dome: we find the state sick: few good men promoted; many ill and the 
worst of men promoted; some have denyed the Kings supremacy: some 
must have 2 pardons: all are disturbers of the peace of the Church. The 
Kings atturney commanded to draw a draught which he did like the issue 
of a Deed and sent it to the Lord Bishop of Winchester, who must pen it : 
I hope the King will not suffer this bad Bishop long to serve the palace 
and be about him. Let us looke to Clerkenwell there find Jesuits: re- 
prieved, bayled, for nothing but denyinge to the best of Kings and men; 
there due allegeance: moved for a Remonstrance. 

Sir Ed [ward] SeymorJ reported what they had done with Mr. 
Atturney. That they went to the Att[orney's] chamber but not finding 
him there, went with Mr. Long to his house, where they received from him 
a letter of Mr. Atturney s directed from himself: conteyning directions to 
proceede agaynst the persons taken at Clerkenwell. There he directeth 
to proceede agaynst 3 as priests:'' for the rest to tender the oath and 
upon refusall to proceede to conviction. That Mr. Long desired to have 
mett with Mr. Attiuney and have considered of the evidence but they 
never mett. 

' Cf. Nicholas (p. 151). 

J Grosvenor meant Sir Francis Seymour. 

i" Moore, Parre, and Weeden. Nicholas (p. 152). 



February 16 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 215 

That they went to Mr. Attiirneys house: they required him to give a 
satisfactory answer to such things as shold be demanded: and himself sett 
his answere downe in his owne hand. After he seemed timerous to deliver 
in that paper before he consulted with the King yet after he did. 

We demanded the order of the Counsell board for prosecucion in the 
bonds: and warrant by which they were bayled. He sayd: the first 2 they 
were at his chamber, for the 3 : that he would confer with the King before 
he wold answer. 

This morning we went agayn. He delivered his order from the counsell. 
For the warrant and bonds that he had not heard from the King to deliver 
them as yet. He desired to review his paper and added somewhat. It 
was read. 

His answer that: he sent for Mr. Long: that he w'as advised so to do 
by Mr. Secretary Coke: that he was not injoyned by the Counsell to goe 
to Newgate himself: that he had intitled the King to the goods. He had 
warrant from the King to bayle them: and must acquant the King before 
he reveale the names. The bonds he took and keept them. And for the 
suretyes he referrs himself to the bonds: because some of them were 
housekeepers. That he gave noe directions to Mr. Long eyther to endite 
them as Priests or Jesuits, but in generall. The warrants and bonds I 
kept: but have not leave from the King yet to deliver them.* 

The order from the Consell board read and the Attiurneys letter to Mr. 
Long. 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymor: that the order was playne to the Atturney to 
proceede agaynst Jesuits: his letter to Long was to proceede agaynst 
Priests, and noe otherwise. 

Mr. Selden reported: that they had been with Mr. Long who con- 
fessed that Crosse came to him with the papers and directions for his 
proceedings. He returned him back and required warrant by writing: 
when he received this letter. That upon the Attur[ney's] directions he 
indicted them as priests: that he acquanted the Lord Chief Justice in 
generall : that he had diverse papers that conduced to the provinge them 
priests or Jesuits. In the Court : some evidence by mouth at the bar : Long 
considering that the matter was commended to him offered to the Court such 
things as he had to prove the matter in question. That the Lord Chief Jus- 
tice called to him, and asked what he cold produce : he told him there agayne 
that he had diverse papers from Mr. Secretary and Atturney to prove them 
priests. Then was he lu-ged that if he had any thing to prove priests or 
not priests he shold shew it. He then produced Lathams examinacion 
and told them that he had further matter, and that those papers wold 
make it appear that they had a CoUedge of Jesuits: and was called by the 

' For the full text see Rushworth, 1:657. 



216 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 16 

name of Domus prohationis Sancti Ignatii. When he had sayd thus much 
then Lord Richardson sayd: we are upon a poynt in issue betwixt the King 
and these men, and be what will they must have right: and then 
Long stayed till the Judges had done. Then Long was demanded agayne 
whether he had any other matter in evidence: he sayd that in that paper 
hee had what wold be materiall. That Lord Richardson sayd that by 
discourse was to noe purpose, but to the poynt in issue Priest or no priest 
That Long then told them that his papers would manifest it, and that in 
the house was taken vestments for Priests : and agayne offered to open his 
papers:there was no reading of the papers at all. The papers of 2 kinds: 
examinacions: and the papers brought into this house. None of the ex- 
aminacions read but that of Lathams which fell to the ground of its own 
nature. That Long sayd that he did beleve that he had enough in his 
papers to have proved them all priests. 

Sir Tho[mas] Hoby. That Justice Whitlock sayd at the tryall: 
that they were come to doe right to all. 

Sir Jo[hn] Coke: Mr. Long hath carried himself in this busines as 
a careful minister : yet wished to bee satisfied in one thing : the papers not 
read: aquitting of the priests followed. There was a Commission to intitle 
the King to there goods : they demurred how they cold find them, when 
the Court had found them not gilty but upon reading of the papers they 
found the bill. Soe though one Court acquitted them an other found 
them guilty. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich: to send some severally to the Judges to have 
there answere how they proceeded upon this tryall. 

Sir Miles Fleetwood. One Middlemore a generall sollicitor for 
almost all the Recusants of England: wished him to be examined. 

Sir Robert Phillips: however we may receive satisfaction from 
the Judges I think of Judges in such a busines never the like example: 
moved to go on warely : and not to send to them before we had distributed 
the parts: and that Mr. Selden shold prepare this busines agaynst morn- 
ing. 

Sir Tho[mas] Fanshaw moved that the Indictment shold be sent 
for.- 

Sir Dudley Diggs: to appoynt a Committee: who out of the papers 
shold think what was fitt to be asked of the Judges. 

Mr. Godfrey: that Judge Richardson shold be demanded, why he 
being but a 2d Judge should take upon him to rule the whole busines, and 
to refuse the Evidence offered. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: fitt to send to the Judges: but first an extraxcion 
out of the papers of what is fitt to interrogate them. Moved for a Sub- 
committee to consider of it this afternoone: and to present it to morrow. 

n> Cf. Nicholas (p. 153)- 



February 17 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 217 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich: that he wold presently have the Judges sent 
to and only asked whether any papers were offered for evidence: whether 
they were read: and why they were not read.° 

17 FEB. 

James was called to the Bar, for having misinformed the house, that 
Mr. Recorder sent his warrant for reprieving Moore, And having on his 
knees confessed his fault; was pardoned further censure.* 

All Committees for this day and to morrow adjorned till Thursday.'' 

One Mr. Perriman, who caused a Suppena to be served upon Mr. 
Speccott," within the dayes of priviledge, was cauled to the bar to answer 
his contempt to the house. He was discharged: upon his excuse, being 
that the footman who brought down his processe lingered the tyme till it 
was within the dayes of priviledge. 

A peticion from Ri: Chambers marchant shewing that he hath im- 
ported goods since his complaynt here: and can not get the possession of 
them by reason of a warrant from the Counsell dated 15 Feb: to stay all 
goods till customs be payd.*^ 

Sir Robert Phillips. This peticion is remarkable in 2 particulars. 
1. The warrant is from the Counsell for staying of goods and strickt 
examinacion of former warrants. 

2: Replevins were denyed: I hope upon the answer of the Judges 
that if any had demanded there goods upon a replevin, it shold not have 
denyed it: moved to defer it till Thursday: for to noe purpose to sitt here 
if these things be put upon us. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: not now seasonable to dispute in regard of the 
fast to morrow. This is but a new reparacion of the old Injury: A Re- 
plevin sought for in the Exchequer: a Court that secluded them from 
other courts; they deny it: this a secluding the subject from his right. 
Moved to lett this passe till the report of the whole marchants busines. 
But that the Customers who are the occasion of all this, who are offenders 
in poynt of priviledge, may bee commanded to wayte of this house on 
Thursday:^ and to receive the censure of the house. 

Mr. Selden: To have it referred to the former Committee for the 
marchants. If the marchants have any interest in there goods; then strange 

n See Nicholas (p. 153). and True Relation (p. 81), for the resolution upon this motion. 

February 17. 

aC/. C.J. 1:930. 

b Wednesday, February 18 had been appointed for the Fast. 

<=Speckat. C.J. 1:930- 

d Cf. True Relation (p. 8i). 

• This was ordered by the House. C.J. 1:931; True Relation (p. 81). 



218 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 17 

they have noe way to gett them: having sought in all the Courts of West- 
minster: if there goods may be thus taken away: then no mans goods safe. 
To take care to help the marchants to possession of that whereunto we 
must give a part : and to give authority to the Committee to find out the 
fittest way to gett the marchants there goods. 

Sir Hu[Mphrey] May: found fault with Mr. Selden that he sayd an 
affront was done this house; and that all the Courts of Justice were shutt 
up agaynst these men. 

Ordered this peticion to bee referred to the Committee for the mar- 
chants goods. 

Committee of Religion 
Mr. Pym in the Chaire 

Sir Tho[mas] Hobby: reported that they had bene with the Lord 
Chief e Justice: and had proposed to him questions: whether the arayn- 
ment of the Priests at Newgate, there were not further evidence by papers 
offered on his Majesties behalf to be further given by Mr. Long: that he 
remembered not any papers rejected or offered to be read: but produced 
noe proof e to his remembrance. 

Mr. Wansford reported from the Lord Richardson: who readely gave 
them accesse though he had many suiters. We lett him know that the 
great Committee had occasion to examine the arraynment of priests which 
was the same question reported by Sir Tho[mas] Hoby. He sayd that the 
Indictment was fond at Gild Hall before: and that he was not Justice of 
Peace in London but at that tyme came as Justice of Oyer for that service : 
that there were 3 indicted for priests, and had pleaded before his comminge : 
agaynst whom were 2 witnesses, Crosse and Longe, who being desirous 
to speak did soe a good while of the maner of the house and taking of 
them : that there was spech of papers but Mr. Longe never pressed to have 
them read : but since his being there till Saturday last by rumors he never 
knew what was contayned in those papers : ney ther cold he heare all Mr. 
Long sayd: that the papers were neyther read nor pressed to be read: 
and knew noe reason except because Mr. Long thought them not to be 
priests as they were indicted. He desires the good esteeme of this house: 
and to stand clere in yoiir opinions. 

Sir Tho[mas] Barrington reported from Judge Jhones who was will- 
ing to deliver his answer in writing which was read. That he came to 
the sessions about 10 of the Clock: that being not well, he regarded not 
the service soe as he shold : that Mr. Longe offered papers ; but why they 
were not read he knoweth not. That one of the Judges sayd they must 
prove them to be priests or else not to purpose. 

Sir Miles Fleetwood reported from Judge Whitlock: who sayd that 
he was there Wensday and Thursday: it was late before he returned from 
diner: that the prisoners were arayned: and evidence given before his 



February 17 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 219 

ret\irn. That there was noe evidence of papers offered by Mr. Longe 
after his comminge: which for his part shold willingly beene received. 

Sir William Constable reported from Judge Crook: that he affirmed 
he saw noe papers offered by Mr. Longe to have bene given in evidence 
after his coming to court. 

Brian William : keeper of the new prison : sent for into the house : who 
confessed that he had 5 prisoners committed to him: that 4 of them were 
sent to Newgate: the 5th was discharged by the Lords of the Counsell the 
12 of Jiily. His name was Joseph Hill:^ having entered into Bond at the 
Table to for his appearance. 

All the counsell of the house disclaymed any knowledge :e but they 
would informe themselves. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich: that the Judges in there answers denyed the 
expresse testimony we had by Mr. Longe. And moved that Sir Fr[ancis] 
Darcy who was there shold be asked what he hard. 

Sir F[rancis] Darcy: that he heard Crosse call for papers: but doth 
not remember that Longe offered any to be read. 

Sir Robert Phillips: that a Subcommittee be named to take these 
answers: to designe the particulars to Mr. Longes narrative; and lett him 
bee by to see what he can say to justify his relacion. 

Mr. Selden: that tho the Lord Richardson sayd he could not heare 
Mr. Longe, yet I being as far agayne from Mr. Long hard him: yet I would 
be loath to heare better then my Lord Chefe Justice Richardson: there 
were many present: the Clerks who sate under. Moved to examine some 
of those who stode next to Mr. Longe. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich: that Mr. Long shold justify his accusacion: 
and name his witnesses for profe'' and then the house to send for them. 

Mr. Dudley Diggs: that the Jury might be examined.^ 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: that Mr. Longs was not an accusacion, neyther 
is he bound to make that good : for he was sent for onely as a witnes, and 
soe examined. Moved that Mr. Long shold be examined whom he 
thought most fitt to give testimony to justify his informacion. 

Sir William Bulstroade : moved that the Justices of Peace in London 
and about, shold certify the nomber and names of Recusants in and about 
London. 

Sir Fr[ancis] Darcy: that a certificate had bene already sent to the 
Counsell table. 

Mr. Whitacres: that the papists in 3 parishes came to 800. We 
have a colony of papists: who are a grevance to the inhabitants in there 

' Underhill. Nicholas (p. I54)- 

' See Nicholas (p. iS4) for the testimony of May, the Chancellor of the Dutchy. 

"> Cf. True Relation (p. 82). 

' Cf. Nicholas (p. 154). 



220 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 17 

birth: in there life and after there death; when a child borne they indeavor 
to have it clirist[en]ed by a priest. When they are children: the father 
and mother grow at difference whether the child shal goe to masse or not: 
at riper yeares: the priests labour soe to pervert them that they have lost 
there witts: when any ly sick; they make meanes to come to them and 
pervert them: and then to draw them to popish buriall after death. We 
the ministers of Justice have done our best to cast out these dwellers: 
but they are too strong for us : I hope our Justice will take order. Palmer, 
Cole, St. Johns: priests and prisoners in the new prison: these goe about 
all day to pervert the people. 

Serjant Hoskins: never the like to lett a whole Colledge of Jesmts 
to Bayle. There have bene wolves in Wales, and foxes in the Isle of 
Wight: if they were there now; the people wold not lett them to Bayle. 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillips. A great scandall that the priests and Jesuits 
imprisoned shold walke at Large as if they were noe prisoners: moved the 
keeper of the new prison shold be called in to know the truth of this. 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymer: that the gentlemen of Innes of Court shold 
give account of what papists they have. 

Mr. Longe that the gentlemen of the Coiurt shold alsoe give account 
what papists were there alsoe. 

Mr. Coke. The Innes of Chancery shold alsoe certify. 

Sir Ra[lph] Hopton: for the Colledge of Phisicions to certify. 

Mr. Godfrey: that the doctors of Civill Lawe shold certify. 

Sir Jo[hn] Finch: that the Readers of the Innes of Cotirt, should cal 
to them the assistance of the Benchers and informe this house of all 
papists amongst them: and of those who are harbored in those Innes. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: that the keeper of new prison to be examined: 
whether his priests goe about and by what warrant.^ 

The Keeper called in : and examined. That hee had one Palmer, Cole, 
Townsend, Walcrest,"^ some suspected some acknowledged by themselves 
to be priests. Cole about 2 yeares: Palmer a year: Townsend about 2 
yeares: and soe Waldgrave: St. Johns^ was with him and was delivered 
being sick to Dr. Cadiman"^ by warrant from the Lords. Most of them 
by warrants from the High Commission Court. Sometimes they goe abroad 
with a keeper but without directions : and have more liberty of Late, then 
heretofore. That without they goe abroad they are not able to Live of there 
owne meanes. Heretofore they had a Common purse to meyntayne them: 
which is now given over. Cole confessed himself to be a priest and hath his 
pardon under scale. Palmer confessed himself a Fryer. That when he gives 

1 Cf. Nicholas (p. 15s). 

k Richard Palmer, Thomas Colles, William Walgrave. Cal. St. P. Dom. 1628-29, p. 229. 
' Robert Townsend, John St. John. Ibid. 
™ Sir Thomas Cademan, physician, had been reported to the Council as a recusant. Ibid. 414. 



February 19 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 221 

them leave to goe forth, he sees them eate and drink before and then they 
can doe noe part of there office. That there is very little resort to them: 
the reason because these disorderly like Libert ynes; drinkinge etc. 
That Cole hath a very large pardon, and that he hard Mr. Atturney 
say: if he had known of the pardon before it passed it shold never passe: 
but he knew not how to deliver him: thoug[h]t he cold not be questioned: 
not for his life.'' 

FEB[RUARY] 19 

Officers of the Customs House called in severally first Mr. Dawes: 
demanded that whereas he took 30 of October he took some goods of Mr. 
Roules by what warrant. 

Ans[wer]: by virtue of a Commission from the King 27 July, 2 
Caroli^ and other warrants.'' That Mr. Rolles told him he was a Burgess 
of this house, and that as a member neyther his person nor goods were to 
be touched: I answered that his person was to be free, not his goods." 
That Mr. Rolles demanded his goods the 5th^ of January. That he 
acquanted not the Lords of the Counsell that Mr. Rolles demanded his 
goods: not till the 20th of Jan[uary].^ 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May: that the King and Lords of the Counsell had 
notice that Mr. Rolles was a Parlament man: but till this tyme he never 
hard that any Parlament man had priviledge agaynst the Kings revenue.^ 

Dawes called in agayne: who to questiones answered. That he took 
Mr. Rolles goods for such dutyes as are expressed in that great scale viz: 
for such duties as were formerly taken by King James: the King com- 
manded him that if he were demanded by the Committee particulars, 
what duties he demanded the goods for: he shold expresse in general 
onely for such duties, as were taken by King James tyme: that the King 
told him he ought not without warrant deliver those out of his storehouse. ^ 
He acknowledged his fait for running upon the priviledge of this house 

" See the Keeper's report as given in Nicholas (p. 15s). 

February 19. 

" This was the Commission of 26 July, 2 Caroli, referred to by Eliot. Nicholas (p. 140); Grosvenor 
(p. IQS). It is given in full in True Relation (p. 86). 

b "and other orders from the Lords," Nicholas (p. iSS)- 

" "Mr. Dawes examined, confesseth that he knew Mr. Rowles to be a parliament man, but he never 
heard that a parliament [man] was freed for his goods for duties to the King, and he had a commission 
for the taking of those duties which was paid in King James his time. And for his exposition what he 
meant by duties he had directions from the King by mouth that he should make no explanation what 
was intended by this." Lov^ther 72. 

d "fifteenth." True Relation (p. 83-84). 

»See Dawes's examination as found in Nicholas (p. 155); True Relation (p. 83-84). 

' See True Relation (p. 84) for a speech here by Sir Peter Heyman. 

e "that the King sent for him on Sunday last, and commanded him to make no further answer." True 
Relation (p. 84, n. 5). 



222 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 19 

which was not willingly but of ignorance for he never understood that 
goods of a Parliament] man were priviledged: but his person. 

Dawes called in agayne. Sayd: that he stands named in the last 
grant: but not as a farmer, but an accountant: but in that before he was 
noe patentee, but had a 32 part: which had long had. That the affi- 
davit he had made was as an officer, he stayed the goods, not as having 
any interest. 

That there is not past half a score^ others who have refused to pay 
tonage besides the partyes complayning : that they have there goods agayne : 
having promised to pay what shold be due: but they being unwilling to be 
knowne desired to have there goods as privately as they might.' 

Mr. Carmarthen the Customer called in: and sayd that he seized Mr. 
RoUes goods for such duties as were payd in King James tyme: that Mr. 
Rolles demanding his goods as a Parlament man he denyed and sayd that 
if the body of the Pari [lament] were contracted in him he could not deliver 
his goods without further warrant. J 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: what the question is we all know: not only for 
the interest of the goods of a member: but of the Interest of the members 
of this house. For if we may be thus impeached, we can not sitt here to 
dispute it. 

2 things to be considered. 1 : Upon the whole fact whether we con- 
ceive these parties are delinquents, whether a breach of priviledge in them; 
whether by one or both. I wold not proceede in the later till this be 
determined. 

2 : If these be delinquents, what punishment they shal undergoe : for 
both are not equall offenders. 

Mr. Wansford. This busines of great Consequence in it self and as 
it stands accompanied with many circumstances: to declyne the delin- 
quency of these men for this tyme because the Kings interest much in 
this: as we see by his command to Dawes. To goe to the King and by 
remonstrance to desire the possession of the goods before we proceede to 
tunnage etc. 

Mr. Kyrton: he thinketh not that the King will respect a customer 
before the Body of the Parlament: Goods of a Parliament man] taken 
in tyme of priviledge: this makes Dawes a delinquent. Wee can not sitt 
here, if wee doe not this. 

Mr. Pym: noe fitt tyme to debate this at this tyme: for first fitt to 
settle the principall till wee determine the incident. The Liberties of the 

k "About 10," Nicholas (p. 156). 

' C/. Nicholas (p. ISS-S6); True Relation (p. 84). 

J C/. Nicholas (p. 156); True Relation (p. 84). 



February 19 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 223 

Kingdome have bene broken: the Liberty of this house is inferior to that, 
and that more publik first to be determined > 

Mr. Long: the Customers were brought hither only for to answer in 
poynt of Priviledge. 

Sir Simeon Steward: are we fitt to determine and debate any thing. 
We can not defend our owne Liberties as all Courts doe in the like case : to 
make them first to know they have offended our Liberties soe shal they 
know better they have offended agaynst the Commonwealth. 

Mr. Sollicitor. Dawes delivered that the Commission gave au- 
thority to the Customers to seize goods of marchants for such duties as 
were payd in King James tyme. If the previledge of Pari [lament] be due 
for goods agaynst the King then the Kings Bayliffs can not distrayne for 
his rent: not to call them as delinquents. 

Mr. Selden: fit and high tyme to proceede. What we doe in a 
right way and justly will not displease his Majestie. If any ministers 
misrepresent us to him let the curse lyght upon them and not on us. In 
former tymes: when priviledge came in question, noe matter proceeded 
tni that was determined: if not they will come shortly and take the mace 
from before you, and say they have a Commission for it: that they have 
noe Commission to seize at all goods but to Levie: for proceedinge. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich. I can not disceme upon what ground we 
shold insist for this breach of priviledge. 2 things to be considered: 1 
whether in the Kings case a Pari [lament] man have priviledge for his 
goods, when right pretended by the King. Another thing is : we have not 
used in any case wherein the Kings Command came to doe a busines, 
fallen upon the minister: but gone to the King himself. Moved for a 
Subcommittee to look to the presidents in this case. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott. The speciall thing spoken is whether we shal 
now proceede or not : and for that there hath bene variety of opinions. I 
can not but wonder when I find in that particular the honor of this house 
in question. For that moved that we shold first determine the generall 
question of the liberty of the Kingdome:^ I shal never undervalue the 
priviledge of this house to think them inferior to any Liberty of the 
Kingdome : nay the ground of all : Let the examples of these tymes shew 
us, that if we dispute them not, we may loose them. As to that consid- 
eracion that our proceeding may reflect upon the King. All our pro- 
ceedings such to him, that I hope he will acknowledge our care, and 
revere our actions.™ 

I'C/. Nicholas (p. 156-57). 
' Pym's proposal. 
" Cf. Nicholas (p. 157); True Relation (p. 8s). 



224 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 19 

Sir Dudley Diggs. We may defer this without prejudice: Sir 
Ed [ward] Coke being made Sheriff to kepe him hence: was layd aside 
without prejudice:" if wee goe on wee may have prejudice. 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May: desired that our wisdomes might govern our 
Liberty: and not our Liberty our wisdome. Let noe man think it is not 
a rock to putt the Kings command to a minister in question for delin- 
quency, for if that bee determined actum est de imperio. Decline the 
question and remember : that a Committee is in all to see how to rectef y 
those rubbes made in the Exchequer: your waies are open to all your de- 
sires: chek not these hopes." 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: I rise out of the 2ble duty in poynt of honor 
and in poynt of order : to explicate my self and to desire others to explicate 
themselves: in that which gives mee great scandall. He made a doubt of 
bring [ing] the Kings command to a question of deHnquency. The King 
can not command a thing soe unjust as the violacion of our privi- 
ledges is.p 

Now to cleare himself: for here (upon this supposicion) that if we 
resolved that question actum est de Imperio: for us to enter into a dis- 
pute of that which might draw such a conclusion were high treason in us 
all : moved he shold explane himself. 

Mr. Speaker: In speches may fall out phrases which sometymes 
may be taken one way; sometymes another. That nothing but love may 
goe on, take noe excepcions at phrases. 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May: Far from my meaninge to wrong the gentle- 
man: I told you that, if you questioned these who justified there Act by 
the Kings command: the King wold think his Command were ques- 
tioned. <> 

By question resolved that we shall now take into further consideration 
the matter of priviledge of this house violated by Mr. Dawes and Mr. 
Carmarthen. 

By question resolved none to goe forth without leave. 

The house resolved into a grand committee. Mr. Herbert put into 
the chayre. 

Presently adjomed till morninge: and the Speaker comming into the 
chayre it was ordered that we should procede in noe other busines till this 
were dispatched. All Committees to cease in the mean tyme.' 

n For a summary of this case see the old Parliamentary History, 6:421-22, 424-25. 

Cf. Nicholas (p. 157)- 

p Nicholas makes Eliot shade this off a little: "He hath heard that the King cannot command a thing 
which tends to the breach of parliament priviledge." 

1 According to Lowther (p. 73), May's explanation was that "no man will obey the King's command 
hereafter." 

'C/. Nicholas (p. 158); C.J. 1:931- ' 



February 20 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 225 

FEBR: 20. 

1°. A Bill agaynst exportacion of wooll, woll fells, and fullers earth. 

Monday appoynted for the Committee to meete concerning the com- 
playnt of Mr. Novell agaynst Sir Ed: Mosley in the Star Chamber: wherein 
the Knights of Cheshire. 

A peticion agaynst a patent granted to the Gynny Company.* Re- 
ferred to the Committee for grevances. 

An Act for the better inabling the executers of the will of Tho[mas] 
Sutton deceased: concerning the manors of Littlebury and Hadstock: 
bequests to the Earl of Suffolke paying 10000£. Committed Friday, Cotirt 
of Wards: my self one: power to heare consell. 

A peticion from Phillip Bushell agaynst the Lord Falkland, and Lord 
Sarfield in Ireland for hanging Phil. Bushell: found gilty and hanged for 
a supposed murther by combynacion to gayne his estate. 

Mr. Coriton presented a letter of the Duke of Buckinghams, where- 
by he advised the parties to compound : and to goe to Ireland. 

It was not suffered to be read. 

Mr. Selden: what we shal doe with this peticion: concerning Ireland: 
It is frequent to send peticioners out of Ireland for abuses hither unto 
both houses. Moved not to refer it hence to any private Commissioners. 

Mr. Glanvile: to refer it to the Committee for Courts of Justice.^ 

Sir Gyles Bridges: had leave to goe downe.° 

Mr. Hambden: moved that Sir John Worsman the Customer might 
also be called in being in the same Case with Dawes and Carmarthen: 
that if soe we might procede with all alike. '^ 

Sir John Worsnam* called in, and demanded the same questions that 
Dawes was: sayd that they were commanded by the King to stay the 
goods were onely taken for duties, and soe levied it. That he conceived 
that a Parlament man was not to have priviledge of goods against the Kinge. 

That he was a patentee in the lease for Customers : that they were sent 
for by the King and intreated to take the Customes: which we did with 
this: wee were to pay 150000£ certayne, if we lost by it, the King was to 
beare it: he delivered in the Lease. 

The Grand Committee: Mr. Herbert in the Chayre. 

The order read.* 

February 20. 

» The petition was "from divers Clothiers of Kent against the Patent of Guynney and Benney." 
C.J. 1:931. 

b Upon question it was so ordered. CJ. 1:931; Nicholas (p. 158); True Relation (p. 85-86). 

<= "and is to return within three weeks," added in CJ. i:93i. There seems to have been no thought 
that the Parliament might be dissolved before that time. 

^ Though he was on important committees, this is Hampden's only recorded speech. 

' i.e. Sir John Wolstenholme. 

' This was the order of the day before, stating what business was to be debated in this committee. 



226 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 20 

Mr. Selden: first to consider in what cource to proceede. To agree 
of the last. The fact as it is barely to be considered. In that however 
all 3 customers have bene parties to the taking away Mr. Rolles goods: 
yet there cases are all severall: best to single out there cases. Sir John 
Worsmans case: thus: what ever the house was possessed of by relacion 
here or at the Committee we are possessed of by the report. The case 
thus : that he took the goods for such duties as are mencioned in the Com- 
mission yet at the former Committee he expressed it was for tunnage. 
Case: When noe grant in Being by Act of Parl[iament] for tunnage 
and pond [age] procures to him self a lease of all such subsidies and cus- 
tomes as were payd in King James tyme: and doth explane to us himself 
he meant tunnage and pondage. Hee had a Commission to take and 
levy: and not to seize: he takes them within the dayes of priviledge from 
a burgesse of this house and in pursuance of this, he doth afterward take 
an oath that he took these goods for duties due to the King and noe 
interest of his owne: notwithstanding he had the lease. 

Mr. Dawes Case. Hee had no lease but professed that he contracted 
with the Lessees for a 32 part which he had in Tunnage and pondage and 
in this right takes them : yet in pursuance he sweres he had noe interest ; 
but took them for the Kings duties. He had noe power to seaze but to 
Levy. 

Mr. Carmarthens Case is the same with Dawes: save in 2 particulars. 
1, that he had noe interest: 2, concerning the words which he spake viz: 
that when Mr. Rolles told him he was a Parliament man] told him that 
if the whole body of the Parliament] were contracted in him, he cold not 
deliver them.^ 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: moved that these severall Cases may be severed 
and to proceede with one first, and so speake to that onely: and after 
with the rest. 

Mr. Wild: wished that the Commission shold first be read: whereby 
they had power to Levy. 

Ordered: to proceede first with Sir John Worsnams Case. 

The Commission was read : 

Customes: Subsedies: Imposts: to be payd till by Pari [lament] it may 
receive settling. If any refuse to pay: to commit them to prison; there to 
continue till they submitt themselves to obeydience. Power to Customers, 
to receive take and levy. Command to the Barons: and all Justices and 
officers: to give assistance to farmers, customers etc. as effectually as 
heretofore they have bene levied by act of Pari [lament]. Prises to pay 
customes as other marchandise.'' 

« Cf. Nicholas (p. 138-59); True Relation (p. 87). 

•■ For the exact words of the commission see True Relation (p. 86). 



February 20 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 227 

Mr. Pym: moved to have the lease read that the Customers vouch 
(as officers to the King) the Kings Command : as officers to the Exchequer : 
injunctions of that Court.' 

Mr. Harrison: that there was noe clause in the lease that the King 
shold beare the losse only they had that under the scale manuall of the 
King in an other writinge.' 

Sir Jo[hn] Worsnam called in, and moved to poynt out that clause 
wherby the King was to stand to the losse : he sayd he could not poynt it 
out : but of his Credite, there was such a one. 

Mr. Pym: that he cold not find how that lease and the Customers 
affidavit could agree. 

Mr. Sanders: that whether there be such a covenant or not, yet it 
makes all one: for the lease gives them an Interest. 

Sir Dudley Diggs : affirmed that Sir John Worsnam was ever a very 
honest man; and had oft told him that he was but an accountant. 

Mr. Glanvile : the letts to farme for 2 years certayn duties rendering 
150000£ per. annum and some agreement that they shold not loose: a lease 
of the whole and rent reserved: if there were more; they shold have it. 
This certenly an Interest in them.'' 

Sir John Eliott: money advanced by hand: if they were but account- 
ants did they expect noe allowance. 

Mr. Selden: moved to call Sir Jo[hn] Worsnam and to take his sence 
of this clause : and upon that to make the Case. 

Mr. Noy: fit to appoynt some men to see the letters patents to make 
abstracts of what maketh both for them, or agaynst them: then to make 
a Case in writing that none be mistaken. 

Mr. Selden: and Mr. Noy were sent forth to the Customers to see if 
they could poynt out to that clause in the Lease: wherby they conceived 
they were but accountants.' 

Mr. Noy reported; of the Lease: a tyme certeyne: a rent: covenants: 
provisions that if the Rents were behind, and the King signify under his 
Seale that he will resume the graunt then to be voyd. ™ 

Mr. Kyrton: moved that Sir Jo[hn] Worsnam being Collecter of the 
Subsidies of poundage outward: by what authority he seized these goods 
which came inwards. 

Sir John Worsnam: answered that he being commanded by the King 
to be assistant, went in that capacity." 

' The lease was read (True Relation, p. 86). The day before the House had ordered that Sir 
John Wolstenholme bring it with him. C.J. 1:931. 
' Cf. Nicholas (p. IS9). 

^Cf. True Relation (p. 87); Nicholas (p. 159)- 

' While Noy and Selden were out Pym and Dellridge spoke. Nicholas (p. 160). 
™ Nicholas's statement of Noy's report is clearer, (p. 160). 
" Nicholas's report of Wolstenholme's examination is more detailed. 



228 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 21 

Sir John Worsnam denyed that Mr. Rolles did chalenge priveledge of 
Pari [lament] at first when his goods were first seized: nor till after the 
goods were in the Kings storehouse." 

FEB[RUARY] 21 

2°: bills: Peticion:by Sir Arnold Herbert: and Lownes: Committed.* 

A peticion from Tho[mas] Symonds marchant who was not suffered to 
land his cvirrants tho he tendered to pay what was due. Referred to the 
Committee for marchants.'' 

Ordered that all who had letters or coppies of letters written for stay 
of proceedings agaynst Papists shold be brought to the grand Committee 
of Religion this afternoone." 

Grand Committee. 
Mr. Herbert in the Chayre about the Customers. 

Mr. Rolles produced Spencer"^ Potts as a witnesse to testify: that at 
the taking of his goods Mr. Rolles demanded his priviledge. 

He sayd that Mr. Rolles demanded his priviledge: at the seizure of his 
goods at Porters Kay neare the custome house : that Dawes and Carmarthen 
were there. 

Nathanell Downes an other witnes sayth that he was by when Mr. 
Rolls goods were taken up at the Kay: Mr. Dawes and Carmarthen 
being by: wold not suffer the goods to be taken by Mr. Rolles: Sir Jo[hn] 
Worsnam was not there at first; but came after: that Mr. Rolles told them 
he was a Parlament man; and chalenged priviledge for his goods; that Sir 
John Worsnam was not there when Mr. Rolls demanded his priviledge.* 

Mr. Littleton: for priviledge.* A man can not distreyne for a rent 
in tyme of Parlament: after he may distreyne for the arrearages. 17 Ed: 4: 
Pari. Roll. art. 35.8 Xhe King our Sov[ereign] Lord, pray us the Com- 
mons, that it hath bene usuall that Knights litigents have had freedome 
that they shal not be attached in there persons or goods during Pari [la- 
ment]: there comming or departing. 5 Hen. 4: Par[liament] numero 78 

° Dawes, Carmarthen, and Rolles were all examined before the grand committee broke up. Nicholas 
(p. 161). 

February 21. 

» "An Act for Reversal of a Decree in Chancery, made between Sir Arnold Herberte, Knight, and 
others, Plaintiffs, and Lawr[ence] Lownes." C.J. 1:932. 

b C/. True Relation (p. 87-88); Nicholas (p. 161). 

«C/. C.J. 1:932; Nicholas (p. 161-62). 

^ Spedman. Nicholas (p. 162). 

« Sir John Eliot spoke at this point. Nicholas (p. 162). 

' For the first part of this speech see Nicholas (p. 162-63) and True Relation (p. 88). 

K Hatsell, Precedents of Proceedings in the House of Commons (London, 1796), 1:48-51. Prynne, Par- 
liamentary Writs (London, 1664), 4:771-73. cited hereafter as Prynne. 



February 21 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 229 

case of Teder.^ Peticion that because such a man came with his master 
to the Parlament: they desired that if any man did kill a Parliament] 
man or his servant that it shold be treason: but the Kings answer was: 
that he shold render himself or be convicted: he payd 200£ damages for 
striking a servant. 70 numero, if any arrest of Parl[iament] man: that 
he shold give 3ble damages. 8 H. 6' et 31 H. 6^ and Thorps Case. 12 
Ed: 4: 2 Cases of 2 servants to Parl[iament] men: one a knight the other 
Erl of Essex.'' In 17 Ed. 4' declared that [a] Parliament man] ought 
not to be impleaded in Parl[iament] tyme. 

In tyme of Prorogacion: within the dayes of priviledge: priviledge is 
to be had. 

3: right of priviledge for goods is due agaynst the King. The King is 
never soe high, as when he sits in Parliament]: it is more advantage for 
the King to have the members sitt here, then away: which they can not 
doe, except they have there goods."* Concluded that Mr. Rolles ought to 
have his priviledge for his goods. 

>> Cheddar's case. See Prynne, 4:643; also Rot. Pari. 3:S4i. 542. 
' The case of Larke, servant of a member. Rot. Pari. 4:357. 

i Thorpe's case. Rot. Pari. 5:239-40. Lowther (p. 73), errs in giving 31 Hen. VII for 31 Hen. VI. 
^ See Prynne 4:752-54, a case in the Court of the Exchequer. 
' num. 35. Rot. Pari. 6:191. 

•" Lowther (pp. 73-74) gives Littleton's speech so fully, though very inaccurately, that it is worth 
reproducing here. We shall put in brackets the references. "That Mr. Rowles shall have privilege 
for his goods as well as for his person, appears by divers authorities both ancient and modern. 

And first; the ground of all privilege is for the general good, and the great respect that is of it appears 
by 31 Hen. VI iRot. Pari. 5:239], that the Judges thought it too high a thing to give their opinion in. 

And for authority in it, in 18 Edw. I [Hatsell, 1:3-6], that both lands and goods are privileged ; and 
so it is in 18 Rio. II, upon a petition in the parliament house that one might distrain for rent, it was de- 
nied, as it is said, quia inhonestum videtur. 

Vide 7 Edw. II. close roll, membrane. [This must be 8 Edw. II. See Hatsell, 1:7, and Reyley's 
Placita (London, 1661), 55i]- 

17 Edw. IV, parliament roll, articulo 35. That no man being a member shall be touched in per- 
son or goods, in coming, staying, or going to or from parliament. 

5 Edw. IV, rotuli parliamenti, numero 78 [vide supra]. Cheder's case, it was petitioned that if any 
man killed a parliament man or his servant it might be treason, and for striking or suing other penalties 
("que le inferance del c"). 

9 Hen. IV f.i". And in rotuli parliamenti, numero 71, in "un petition que leur serants ne po' estre 
arest pour dett accoupt etc., Le answer fuit par le Roy, que fuit remidie den*." 

8 Hen. VI [vide supra], 31 Hen. VII [rightly Hen. VI. vide supra], Thorpe the Speaker "fuit arest 
in temps del progation del parliament," and was not delivered upon petition because he was arrested with- 
out time of privilege of parliament. 

34 Hen. VIII [Prynne, 4:779-80], et 36 Hen. VIII [Prynne, 4:780-83 ]," que par un condemnation 
in dett etc. den' le parliament, ne serra trouble ou arrest p^ c." 

I. Car., Sir Edward Coke "ad privilidge del parliament mes est que in temps del vacation, null home 
ad privilidge mes p' les jours del vacation que sont 16 jours all myens." 

"Mes nota que in 29 Eliz. [D'Ewes, Journals of all the Parliaments during the Reign of Queen Eliza- 
beth, (London 1682), 410] in le case del un Martine le reasonable temps del privilidge fuit reduce all 20 
jours." 

36 Hen. VIII, "le case del Carus, que serra privilidge pur byens vers le Roy, et fuit dit que p' un 
r' dew all Roy, ne serra un distresse p' c. durant le temps del parliament." 

In 12 Jac. "suites in le Starchaiiiber que sont les suites del Roy serra staye p' privilidge; ut in le 
case del Senior CPare, et Sir Symiond Steward et est valde frequent." 

12 Eliz. "Le case del Johnes ad son privilidge p' byens, que fueron deliv a lui apris seisure." 

"Et fuit le darien parliament adjudge in le House de Seniors que un del leur servants avera privilidge 
p' son byens." 

The rest of Littleton's speech may be omitted here. For the part dealing with the Stanhope case 
see Nicholas (p. 163, and note). 



230 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 21 

Sir Robert Phillips: How needful it is to have priviledge a large 
field : the summe of all. That we see in generall experience, how easly we 
see the prerogative of Princes thrive, when the Liberties of Subjects are 
at a stand. The goods in generall I suppose is that recorded in 8° Eliz. 
[illegible] when it was resolved that the goods of Parliament men] shold 
be priviledged. 3° Jac: in tyme of prorogacion betwixt 2 sessions a 
seizure made by some writt: and Commission granted to the SherifE of 
Hampshire to seize the goods. Sir William Kingswill:" ordered that he 
shold have priviledge of goods : that a Command was to goe to the Sheriff to 
staye his goods which was done. Eliz: 29°:° resolved that the convenient 
tyme of priviledge after the Session shold be allowed: which was then re- 
solved to a definite tyme, which was 20 dayes before : and 20 dayes after. 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May: moved to take this according to Lawe, and au- 
thority, and not according to reason. In all Courts of revenue, Westminster 
was ever graunted extents agaynst Parlament men for leving the Kings debts. 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymor: I am sorry to make other mens errors the 
Kings. This will not reach to the Kings case. Wished first to resolve 
whether this case did at all concerne the King.p 

Mr. Glanvile. Tyme enough for us to dispute the Kings Cases 
when they are not in question: this is not the Kings Case nor concemeth 
him. If the Ejng have a settled revenue of Record before his auditor: 
there is noe replevin lyes: but if any wil seize my goods; and tell me a 
tale of the Kings right when there is noe color : shal I say this is the Kings 
right. If any thing be by suttlety granted from the King agaynst Law 
it ought not to be suffered, but the parties are trespassers. Because my 
goods be taken for noe cause: therefore I shal not have a Replevin. Where 
the King maketh a grant which is voyd the party is a trespasser.^ 

Sir Jo[hn] Coke: not under a specious pretence to doe that which 
may hinder our liberties hereafter. The matter now is in question is Mr. 
Rolles: his case. We must distinguish the right of the subject in generall 
from that of a Parlament man. We must suppose that the King having a 
possession; must be supposed to have a right. 

The King is a Parl[iament] man as well as we are: not soe to advance 
our priviledge as to justle with the King. The iCing hath possession: and 
as a Pari [lament man] ought not to be taken out of possession. Moved to 
think whether this house can determine this priviledge or not.' 

Mr. Banks : that particular men have ther priviledge none will question 
it: al inferior coiirts have ther priviledge, much more this of Pari [lament]. 

■> Sir William Kingswell. See C.J. i:343- 

"This is incorrectly given in True Relation (p. 89) as 19 (with a variant, 12), and by Nicholas as 
24. For Marten's case see D'Ewes, 4io-i4. 

p Cf. Nicholas (p. 164); True Relation (p. 89). 

>i Cf. Nicholas (p. 164). 

' Sir John Strangeways spoke at this point. Nicholas (p. 164); True Relation (p. 90). 



February 21 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 231 

In the Law of Moses a cermoniall as well as a moral and Judiciall. Our 
priviledge of P[arliament] may be compared to a hedge about our mimi- 
cipal lawes : if any breach upon that our laws will next be questioned. 

But this too generall. In the particular case 2 things. 1 to separate 
this case from the Kings right: in this case noe interposicion of the Kings 
right. 2 in this case no interposicion of the Kings Command: if neyther, 
then may we clerly proceed. 

1 . The Kings right or duty is not in question : (our books are expresse) 
acts of Par[liament] have proclaymed, and the King expressed, that he 
takes not these duties of right. 

2. Separate from the Kings Command: for that Mr. RoUes is a 
Parl[iament] man. His seizure the 30 of October: the prorogation till the 
20 of October. 34H6:27H3. 12 dayes priviledge before the tearme 
for a man to come inform his Counsell at Westminster. But there is a 
Command for the seiziu-e of these goods: That not the dispute of this 
day: the King had originally given a direction for the taking of Tunnage 
by privy scale, then by a Commision, then by demise: none of these direc- 
tions would extend to a priviledged man of the House of Pari [iament ] for 
where a private direction that will never reach to a particular priviledge. 
7° Ed. 4 fol. 30. If the King will licence Jo[hn] Stile an alien by mort- 
mayne : this will not extend to any land held in Capite. If the King will 
command a levy of tunnage in generall: in law this doth not trench to 
seize the goods of a Parlament man. And upon these reasons that are 
particular we may defend our priviledge as well as upon generall.' 

Mr. Browne. Mr. RoUes to have his priviledge. This depends upon 
one poynt: that this seizure cannot be sayd anyway to be for the Kinge: 
where the King hath noe title, tho he granted letters patents: yet the 
parties who enter are wrong doers. The Kings right to tunnage is ended 
the Act determined: soe the King granteth what he hath noe right to. 
7° Ed. 4: fol. 19. 8. H. 5. A man outlawed had his charter of pardon: he 
that stayed his goods was a trespasser. 

Mr. Sollicitor: 1. We cannot agree upon the question: in the 2d 
place we must goe to the question whether Mr. Rolles be to have 
priveledge agaynst the King. In generaU: a Parliament] man shal have 
priveledge for his person and goods. 11 H. 4. Soe long as a matter of law 
was demanded the Judges of the Common place [pleas] ansered: but when 
it came to Customes, they wold not meddle.* 

Mr. Selden: 1: Whether a pari [iament] man ought to have a 
priviledge of his goods. 2 : whether agaynst the Kinge. Noe matter 

• Cf. Nicholas (p. 164); True Relation (p. 90). 

' Cf. Nicholas (p. 164); True Relation (p. 90) has an important point not given by Grosvenor. 



232 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 21 

what the Courts of Revenue conceive: we are to look to what the Pari [la- 
ment] determines. Priviledge of Parliament is the being freed from all 
troble that may keepe a man from [at]tendinge at Parlament. Mr. Rolles 
case is legally betwixt him and the Customers without any relacion to the 
King. They tell us of the Kings Commission to receive and levie: in 
that noe mencion of any direction that the whole shal be seized for a part. 
They have taken that that noe way concerns the King as 20 parts etc. 
Eyther these duties were due or not due to the King. If they were, 
then by the lease all is conveyed to them. The Covenant by Privy Scale 
cannot alter the Interest. Admitt that the King had interest : yet he" 
ought to have priviledge : for if you allow that there may be a siezure upon 
goods, extents out of the Exchequer ; what man can be assured of lands or 
goods while he sitteth here. For authority in the Kings case: I shal use 
those which have bene used alredy. 17 Ed: 4:'^ noe ParHament man might 
be arrested impleaded or attached by his person or goods. Taylers case. 
Concluded in this Case: Mr. Rolles was to have his priviledge. 

Sir Robert Harley : Quere whether Mr. Rolls was to have priviledge 
in those dayes after the prorogacion. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich. The Lords determined the Last Session^ 
that the goods of a servant of a Parliament] man shold have priviledge 
of goods. ^ 

By question resolved that every member of this house ought to have 
priviledge for his goods and estate. 

Sir Dudley Diggs: If you shal resolve Mr. Rolles to have his 
priveledge you will doe it with meaning of fruite: to whom will you 
direct your warrant: at length it will tend to examine the Kings interest. 
Where the Kings officer leaves there the farmer begins: and nothing 
yet done by the farmer.^ 

Mr. Noy. If this question had come in 21 Jaco[bi] and had demanded 
priviledge: he shod have had none: because a law. If a man will pawne 
his goods he shal not have priviledge. Tunage: the King kept in posses- 
sion : we know by whom : the law : noe seizure to bee made for refusing to 
pay an imposicion : 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich: We see how tenderly we have bene to voyd 
tuching any thing that may trench upon the King. Moved to proced to 
the question: for it semeth there was noe Command from the King 
at all. 

> Resolved by question that Mr. Rolls crossed out at beginning of new paragraph. 

i.e. Rolles. 

▼ Hatsell 1:48-50. 

» May 6, 1628. L.J. 3:782. 

» Sir Robert Phelips followed Rich. Nicholas (p. 165). 



February 21 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 233 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May wished the warrants^ by the King for the 
seizure shold be viewed before they judged that it be not sayd another 
tyme that this house was wished to know some thing that they would 
needs be ignorant of. 

Mr. Glanvile : that they made nothing to the case: And if the shewing 
of them, shold imbark us in a dispute of the Kings Prerogative : those that 
called for the warrants were the causers of it. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott was sent for the warrants who presently returned, 
and brought them, and made this mocion. It was observed that Mr. 
Dawes referred himself to the warrants hee had delivered to Sir Jo[hn] 
Eliott: that now Mr. Dawes shold be concluded by these things, and 
produce noe more. 

The warrants read. 

1. for 2s-2d In rent: upon currants of the Levant Company: to be as 
carefully payd as that of 3s-4d. Commanded all officers: not to give 
warrants to land them tiU the 2s-2d were payd.= 

2. 20 July: his Majesties absolute will about the imposicion upon 
currants. 

3. 21 Septe[mber] 1628.^^ 

4. 20 Sep[tember] 1628. 

18: Nove[mber] 

12 Dec. 9 Jan.2 

Mr. Hackwell proposed some doubts. The last Sessions was pro- 
rogued till the 20th of October. His goods seized the 30th of October. 
Privilege of goods followed the priviledge of person: at that day noe 
necessity of priviledge of person: because noe neede of attendance. 
Upon prorogacion in the tyme of H. 8: writts to the Sheriffs to make proc- 
lamacion to discharge attendance. In later tymes a more expedite way 
fond by proclamacions : which discharges our attendance, soe as we can 
not be fined. And if we be not bound to attend in person, we have noe 
priviledge for our goods. 1606: 26 Feb: Sir J. Kingsmills case.^'' 

Mr. Nov : Mr. Glanvill had a brother to present to a Church, another 
claymed a right: after a Jewry patronate: that man labored by allmeanes 
to goe on by a doble querela. 

Thus the Bishop was cited in tyme of priviledge and for not appering 
judged Contumax: And institucion given by the Archbishop: the Lords 

2 By question resolved that the taking of Mr. Rolls goods the 30th of October ought to have his priviledge 
for his goods seized. 

By question resolved that Mr. Rolls in this Case crossed out. 
y "remaining in the hands of Sir John Eliot," True Relation (p. 91). 
» Warrant dated July 15, 1628 for 2s 2d on currants. Nicholas (p. 166). 
»a "Warrant from the Lords . . . to seize the goods of such as refuse to pay the customes." Nicholas 
(p. 166). 

•> •> Cf. supra, p. 230, note n. 



.234 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 23 

have adjudged this Citacion: a brech of priviledge, have adnulled all done 
upon it and the clerk out of possession. 

By question resolved that the 30th of October and 5th of Jan[uary] 
and the tymes since were within the days of priviledge of Parlament. 

2. That Mr. Rolles ought to have priviledge of Parlament for his 
goods siezed the 30th of Octo[ber] the 5th of Jan[uary] or since. ''<= 

23 FEB: 

2°. A private Pet[ition] for Fleminge. Committed Wensday. [Ex-] 
chequer Chamber. 

Sir Tho[mas] Hobby: moved that some might be appoynted to search 
the Records how many have bene convicted Recusants since 1°; Caroli. 
A Committee named. And authority given to search Records, as also to 
search whether Recusants convicted have payd Double. 

2°. Act for preventing corruption in presentacion and collations to 
benefices and in elections to fellowships: and other places in Church, and 
Commonwealth. 

Sir Euball Thelwall: That it bee not left to the Bishop alone to 
take the oath: for in Bangor not one livinge given by the present Bishop 
but for money: that some [one] else might be joyned with them. 

Mr. Packer: That scholerships shold be voyd, if it appeared that 
any m.oney was given though by f rends. 

Committed : Thursday in the Exchequer. The Care to Mr. Pym. 

Mr. Long: That he had notice some ment to goe into the Contrey: 
moved that none might goe without leave under payne of expulsion. 

Mr. Kyrton. That the house might be called: and those who were 
absent punished. 

Ordered that the House shold be called on Monday next. 

The Grand Committee of the Customers breaking priviledge. 
Mr. Harbert in the Chayre. 

Sir Robert Phillips: the business into 5 parts: 2 already past the 
vote of the Committee, that for priviledge in generall and in particular 
for Mr. Rolles. 3 things remayne. 1 the debate on the delinquency of 
the customers. 2 the punishment to be inflicted. 3 the way how to 
invest our member of his goods agayne. To begin with the first viz. the 
delinquency of these men and to sever one from another not being al in 
the same case: and I pray God may give us a united hart in this and all 
things that conceme the Commonwealth. 

Sir William Constable: the order of nature leads us to procede in 
this cause. We see a wound given to a member, and in him to this house. 

<!« Committee adjourned to meet again Monday morning. C.J. 1:932; Nicholas (p. 166). 



February 23 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 235 

The next to seke how to heale this wound; before we think of the delin- 
quency.* 

Sir Robert Phillips : to read the order, how far we may procede in 
the busines of restitucion. 

Mr. Rouse: we are m[aste]rs of our owne orders: that we procede to 
help our member with his goods. 

Mr. Valentyne: to proceede with the delinquency of the parties first. 

Sir Miles Fleetwood: first how to restore Mr. Rolles to his goods: 
by the orderly composing of that question it may be a meanes to bring the 
whole busines to a happy conclusion. 

Mr. Glanvile. Wold decline that question: for the goods be now in 
the Kings storehouse: difficult to get them thence: nowe to punish these 
men: and when they find that in Justice there punishment can not be 
taken of[f] till the goods be restored: they will find a meanes to restore 
the goods. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich. 1 to see how he may have his goods, for 
by that meanes we shal possesse ourselves of that great priviledge which 
we have debated. 2 it suits with the Custom of this house : for as soone 
as we adjudge any to have priviledge, we procede to give it. 

Sir Ben Rudyerd. It is an observacion that Commonwealths are 
more severe then monarchies. We have shewed our justice, and made an 
example of our power by committing the sheriff e of London : let us leave 
some place for clemency. There are disorders of tymes : we shal have of- 
fences enough to punish to pardon to remitt: a gentle hand leaves the 
lest scar. I speak for his sake whose servants they are when they obey : 
and tho we sever them in our imagination they wilbe brought together 
in our action. I shold be sorry we shold be soe greedy to punish others 
as thereby to endanger to punish ourselves. Why shold we break of[f] 
an angry splinter to wond ourselves. Our sentence will be but brutum 
fulmen: how shal we be assured to have tyme to put it in execucion. 

Mr. Littleton. We should not have greter care to cure a scarr then 
to search a wound. Not to speak of Restitucion till the punishment. 
That these parties that have done the wrong shold make restitucion for 
the Damages. 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May. As Job to God tho he kil me I wil love him: 
soe I give the best advise to this house. There is a wond given: we have 
oyle and vinegar before us. If we goe the way to restore these goods : we 
put oyle into the wound, if upon a deHnquency: you put in vinegar: and 
by such course we shall see better to the busines of state then any man 
can advise and such as will direct us to a course how to punish them. 

February 23. 

» He would take up the third point first. See Nicholas (p. 167), 



236 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 23 

Mr. Stroude. The best way to punish them is to lett them alone. 

Sir James Perrott: to procede with the restitucion of goods: 1 be- 
cause the enemies of our Religion are in agitation to break this Parlament : 
falling upon this rock what advantage we give to the enemies to Religion: 
all Phisicions begin with the lenities, not with Corosives, if that will serve. 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May: I wish we heare noe more of the distinction 
betwixt Courtiers, and country gentlemen: nor orators, and reasonable 
men : but know, that good counsell hath bene given you out of reason. 

Sir John Eliott. The wisdome of this Pa[rliament] hath appered 
by the gravity of our procedings: and I hope we shal continue with the 
affection begun in the service of the King and Contry. In this matter : I 
thought the question had bene simply; whether first to addresse us to a 
way to restore the goods : or to proceede to the delinquency : but now it is 
otherwise. For I find it, that it hath an exposicion not whether we take 
that in priority of place, but the cause directly of the breaking up of a 
Parlament and of having these men taken from us: and I can not but with 
admiracion think of these things. This hath bene the argument among 
us since the beginning. Take heed how you urge it for fear of a Rock.*' 
But I shal retayne that assurance of the Justice and goodnes of the King, 
that while we procede as fitt his goodnes is so far cleare that he will not 
break us. Those that bring upon us these terrors lett a Curse light on 
them and there posterity. The delinquency is the next thing we shold 
take in hand: that from them we look for satisff action. They are suffi- 
cient enemies. 

Sir Tho[mas] German. Observed on Saturday the moderacion of 
the house to distinguish the fact of these men from the Command of the 
King. They are now come too nere together. In former tymes when 
violacion hath bene done, we have not preceded to vindicate ourselves: 
but have gone to the King by remonstrance: and sped well. To goe the 
same way to let knowne to him that we are the peple that have bene most 
tender of his prerogative, soe he wold be tender of our priviledges, and 
restore them to us agayne. 

Mr. Ch[arles] Johnes. To proceede agaynst these persons as de- 
linquents. The Lord Popham jud[g]ing the circuite with Justice Fenner: 
a fellow condemned there stabs at the Judges: Pophan went safe: an 
indictment to be drawne: his hand cut of[f]: this example lives: to procede. 

Mr. Hollis. I feare neyther breking nor terror, nor rock, but I 
feare to give my voyce to any thing that I cannot be persuaded of. To 
procede to the pimishment of the offenders: the King not interest [ed] in 
the fait of these men: hee commanded them to stay goods, not to sieze. 

Sir Jo[hn] Coke. The ground to punish these men is because we 
have divided ther case from the King. I must lett you know that the King 

>> Eliot is answering Perrott. Cf. supra. 



February 23 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 237 

hath taken knoledge of the late debate the last Saturday concerning 
the farmers of his Customs, and of the care they had in laboring to 
sever ther case from that of his Majestie. But the King finding this con- 
cerned him in a high degre of Justice and honor thought it nott fitt the 
truth shold be unknowne and that what these men did they did it by 
his expresse command: or by the Counsell board, he being by in person 
or directing : that this can not be divided from his own act and that there 
be noe proceding agaynst them: as highly concerning his honor." 

Sir Dudley Diggs: a tyme of difficulty to speke when we have a 
message from the King which causeth so many to cry adjorne. That if 
his Majestie knew the particuler, that we deale about the Parlaments 
mans goods; and move his Majestie to avow it: to lett him know the 
particuler Case. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott. The Customers are the occasion of this, the 
goodnes of the King wronged. Moved to adjorne the house. Hoping 
the King wold give us a clere way to proceede.*^ 

Sir Robert Py: that the message ought to have bene delivered to 
the house and not to the Committee. Moved that it shold be delivered 
to the house. 

The Committee arose. The Speaker in the Chaire. 

Mr. Harbert reported: that the Committee had taken into considera- 
cion the violacion of there priviledges by the Customers: they resolved that 
Mr. Rools shold have priviledge for his goods taken the 30th of October: 
Jan. 5 and since that tyme : that Secretary Coke delivered a message from 
the King: that they desire he wold deliver the message to this house to 
consider of it. 

Resolved in the house : 

1 that a member of this house ought to have privHedge for his goods 
and estate. 

2 that the 30 of October: and the 5th of Jan. and all tyme since is 
within the priviledge of Par[liament]. 

3 that Mr. Rolls shold have priviledge for his goods siezed the 30th of 
October 5th Ja[nuary] and since.^ 

Secretary Coke : ordered to deliver his message agayne : and further 
sayd : that however this house labored to sever the interest of the farmers 
from the Kings, yet these distractions cannot salve his honor which it be- 
hoves him to mentayne. He wil not be drawne to doe that which is dis- 
honorable upon any collateral meanes.^ 

"Cf. Nicholas (p. 167-68); True Relation (p. 94). 
dC/. Nicholas (p. 168). 

• This report was put in the form of a resolution and, upon question passed by the House. Nicholas 
(p. 168). C.J. 1:932. 

« Cf. True Relation (p. 94-95)- 



238 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 February 23 

Sir Rob[ert] Phillips: That first we pray God to cause us to 
understand truly: and to direct us. The essentiall and fundamental! 
liberty of this house is now before you. Are we now fitt for debate. In 
obeydience to the King and care of our selves that we rise : and to morrow 
with invoking God to consider what way to take in obeydience to his 
Majestic. And in the meanetyme all other business to cease. 

The Lord Gary: for a Subcommittee to draw up how far we have 
proceded : upon what reasons. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: a doble obligacion upon us: to our King, to otir 
Coiintry, to posterity to preserve that right our fathers have left us. It is 
the practise of ministers about him who feare some reflection upon them- 
selves: and not to spare those persons: these clouds are blowne by such 
as seke ther owne security not the Kings honor. 

Mr. Glanvile. He that cold bring light out of darknes will bring 
this to a happy issue and this will prevent those unhappy interruptions 
which have given these terrors. All way to reformacions sems now to 
be stopped: to put a day to Leave: to adjorne till wenesday: this cometh 
from the enemyes to Religion. 

Charles Price. God hath not hard our late humiliations. Some 
unlucky Star sits over us. Our affections charmed, we can not understand 
one another: to come to morrow lest by puttinge it longer of[f] some to 
goe away like discontents: the fate of the Kingdom is in ballance. 

Sir Dudley Diggs: wold have it but put of[f] till to morrow, doe 
nothing but with president: and this will turne to our good. 

Sir Jo[hn] Coke: desired to goe out of this house without any ill 
relish to make a misconstruction of our procedings: wished Mr. Price to 
expond himself of the fait. 

Mr. Price: that the King and this house so inseparable: that what 
wound was given here much toucheth the Kinge.^ 

Mr. Selden: observed: 2 questions out of the message upon which the 
fondacion of the Libertys of the Kingdome and this house are fonded. For 
seing we have fond these men delinquents; we have his Majesties message 
that this concernes his honor and justice if we procede agaynst them. 1. 
Whether a Crime committed by a subject as it is his act, yet whether 
he procuring the Kings command shal stay us from procedinge. This may 
stay all otir procedinge here in this house. 2. Whether any kind of Com- 
mand in our procedinge here shal stay us from giving one. ]\loved to 
take tyme to consider of the height of these questions til Wednesday. 

Sir Hu[mphrey] May: The King takes it to be a high poynt of 
soverenty: as well as wee doe of priviledge. Doe not think so much of the 
Liberty of the Sub[ject] as to forget the soverenty: nor soe much of this. 

« C/. Nicholas (p. 169). 



March 2 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 239 

Adjorned till Wenesday. 

The House was adjorned till Wenesday. In the meane tyme all Com- 
mittees to cease.'' 

25 FEB. 

The Speaker^ delivered a message from the King. 

The King commanded me to signify it is his expresse pleasure that this 
house be presently adjorned till Monday next at 9 of the Clock, and all 
Committees to cease. "^ 

MARCH 2a 

Mr. Speaker delivered a message from the King that it was his Majesties 
pleasure to adjorne this house till to morrow sevenight, and in the meane 
tyme, to not to proceede in any busines. 

1" Instead of this last sentence one group of True Relation states: "And in the mean time the 
Committee for Religion prepared certain Articles which they intended to have presented to his Majesty." 
For a full discussion of the work of this committee, see True Relation (p. loi, note a). 

February 25. 

» Secretary Coke. True Relation (p. loi). 

b At the trial of the leading members arrested as a result of their acts upon March 2, the King's 
attorneys claimed that those arrested members were very active in the interval between February 25 
and March 2. In their Information given in presenting the case for trial they made the following state- 
ment: 

"May it please your most excellent Majestic that when your Majestic upon the said five and 
twentieth day of February had by Sir John Finch Knight then Speaker of the said house of Commons 
signified your Royall pleasure to the said house that your said house of Commons should bee instantly 
adjourned untill the second day of March then followinge. He the said Sir John Elliott and Deinshill 
Hollis Esq., Benjamin Valentyne Gent. Walter Long, Esq. Willyam Corriston, Esq. William Strode 
Esq. John Selden Esquire, Sir Miles Hobarte and Sir Peeter Hayman knightes all members at the same 
time of the said Commons house; Conceaving with themselves that your Majestic being justly provoked 
thereto would speedily dissolve that Parliament they the said Sir John Elliott, Deinshill Hollis, Benjamine 
Valentine, Walter Long, William Corriston, William Strode, John Selden, Sir Miles Hoberte and Sir Peeter 
Hayman and every of them by unlawefull Confederacy and Combination betweene them in the behalfe 
before had, did malitiously resolve agree and conspire how and by what meanes before the Parliament 
should be dissolved they might raise such false and scandalous rumors against your Majesties government 
and your counsell of state attending your person that thereby as much as in them lay they might disturbe 
the happie government of this kingdom by and undere your Majestic interrupt the Course of Traficke 
and Trade, discourage your Marchants, and raise jealousyes and suspicions in the hearts of your people 
that the sinceritye of the true religion professed and established in this Kingdome was neglected. And 
in pursuance of this their Resolucion and confederacy aforesaid the said Sir John Elliott with the privity 
and consent of the said Deinshill Hollis and all others the said Confederates did prepare a paper or writinge 
wherein hee had written or caused to bee written diverse false and scandalous assertions touchinge your 
Majesties Government and Touching the persons of diverse of your privye Counsell which hee and they 
resolved, conspired and agreed should bee delivered into the saied house of Commons and there publiquely 
read to the wicked and seditious intents and purposes aforesaid and not with any purpose or opinion that 
those thinges which were therein conteyned, if they or any of them had beene true, as indeed they were 
nott, should or could bee at that tyme entertayned or pursued in any Legall or Parliamentary way, but 
merely and onely to expresse and vent his and theire owne malice and disafecion to your Majestie and 
your happy government." Harl. 2217, flf. 89-90. 

March 2. 

a For the proceedings on this memorable day the best account is that called March Second. All notes 
explaining the narrative are therefore given under that text. 



240 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 March 2 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: moved to have a declaracion read which he flung 
downe upon the floore. 

Sir William Fleetwood took it up and brought it to the Chaire. 

Much calling for the key.^ 

The Speaker came out of the Chaire: Mr. Valentine and Mr. Hollis 
held him in. 

Mr. Bellasis moved the Speaker to goe out and that we might 
chose another Speker: 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott. That it was the Speakers excuses that hath 
ended the busines: moved to read the paper: and then we shold shortly 
come to a conclusion. 

The Speaker. What wold you have mee to doe: if you were in my 
place: give mee leave to give obeydience to his Majestie and to goe out of 
the Chayre. 

Mr. Strode: that wee goe not out like shepe scattered: but to testify 
to the world we have a care of there safety; and religion. Moved to have 
it read: and that those that wold have it read shold stand up: and testify 
there consent. 

Mr. Valentyne : For the honor and safety of the King and Kingdome 
that this may be read, he our head, we the members: I wish it may be read 
for the safety of the King. 

Mr. Hollis: are we a Parliament] or noe parla[ment]. Are we 
assembled by the King, trusted for the good and safety of the King: the 
Lawes and the Liberties: or are we not. You our servant and are to 
obey our commands that will seciure you. To have it read. 

Sir William Constable. That the Sp[eaker] wold signify the desire 
of the house to the Clerk to have that read. 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymer: think it fitt to be read: question whether now 
or 5 or 6 hours hence. Noe man speaking agaynst it : it is fitt to be read. 

Sir Pet[er] Hamon: I am sory to see such answere of you are but 
our servant. We shal happily think fitt to present this to the King: doe 
not the King that disservice as to stay the reading of it. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: for honor and order of the house. A generall 
desire that the question may be putt: noe one disputeth: a greater con- 
tempt in Pari [lament] I never yet saw or hard: the question is not now 
whether it shal be read now, but whether 6 or 7 hours hence. You are 
excusable to the King for doing that so strictly enjoyned. We shold 
draw you to punishment : if you refuse whether you as a delinquent shall 
not be called to the barr to answere this contempt. The house is re- 
solved to have it read. 

» The word is written very lightly. The first letter is certainly k. According to the March Second 
account the members here called for Eliot to speak. 



March 2 GROSVENOR'S DIARY 241 

The Speaker: such was the strait he was in; that tho he shold 
regard the punishment the greatest misery: yet hee wold undergoe all 
shame to gayne there good will. 

Mr. Speaker: moved that he might goe; and if he returned not to 
them, teare him in pieces. The King was good: he wold doe good offices; 
and hoped he shold return with a good answere. 

Mr. Godfrey; that he shold first heare the paper read, and then he 
might goe better instructed. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: what is presented is not unworthy this house or 
the loyalty of good subjects. If you obey not the Commands of this 
house: then our duty to vindicate the dishonor of the house upon your 
person. God never prospered that man who hath bene blasted with the 
censure of this house : I shold be loth that shold fall upon you. Return 
that paper, I will deliver the contents, that the King and world may under- 
stand our sence. 

Mr. Strode: his servant you are to whom you obey: if not us you are 
none of oiu" servant, eyther refuse or read it. 

Mr. Speaker. It doth not make mee to be none of your servant 
because I am the Kings servant: I will not say; I will not: but I must 
say I dare not. 

Sir Jo[hn] Eliott: with a faithfull hart: and as great affection to 
the King as ever subject. The miserable condicion we are in, the unhappy 
fortune we suffer both in religion and matter of pollecy makes us tender 
the King and good of the subject. You know what discovery in Religion: 
how imdermined by Arminians and Papists: who mask not in strange 
visers : we conceive it not to be simply the priests and papists : but there 
patrons and favorites who have power to check lawe. The persons are 
discovered thence it cometh that we suffer to free themselves. Some 
prelates of the Chiirch: some others: that Bishop of Winchester proved 
what done to the favor of some disfavor of others. Doe we rest here: 
neyther doth the feare arise from this ground: those that contract a feare 
to be discovered of there falts joyne to putt a jealosy in the King agaynst 
this house: in this kind I look upon the Lord Treasurer of England: in 
whose person is contracted all these evils. If I looke into ReHgion or 
polecy : I mete him acting, and building upon the grounds layd by his great 
m[aste]r the D[uke] of Buckingham]: from him and his ill Counsells 
proceded the unhappy conclusion of the last Parliament]. And who is 
an instrument to break Parl[iament], Parliament] in conclusion will 
break him. Relacion of priests and Jesuits only to him: which by good 
profe: feare of our Religion from his person. Feare of his pollecy: in 
Tun[nage] and Pond [age], instruments move by his power. To make this 
land fitt for invasion there must be an impeachment of the trade: then 
our walls the ships ly wast. He doth alsoe invite strangers to come in to 



242 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 March 2 

drive trade: that our merchants shall trade in strangers bottoms: this 
causeth him to cast us into a misunderstanding with the King: and to 
work our miseries. The safty of the King can not be but in the safty of 
his peple. That we protest to defend our Religion: to declare our self in 
defence of the Law which is the Subjects right: that we may the better 
serve his Majestic. To protest agaynst the persons of those men who 
shal consell or act the levying of Tunnage without an act of Pari [lament ] 
as the greatest offenders. That if any marchant shal pay those duties 
voluntarily without an act: that we shod hold him accessary to these 
great offences. 

Mr. CoRiTON : If we love the King, God, our Country : we have reason 
to speke to him now : we came with full harts : and to supply his necessities : 
when we see these things offered here which in former tymes were judged 
treason, when the King shal justify offenders in this house, when offenders 
shal have a command of the King for breaking the Lawes, hence greefe. 

Moved some short thing be presented to his Majestic to shew him his 
danger : and to desire him to take counsell but not from those voted here to 
be ill consellers. 

Mr. Weston: Lord Treasurers sonne. In mee the duty of Subject, 
servant, sonne. Upon weak presumptions to make great complaynts: may 
bring ruine. It is God that judgeth the hart. The actions of his father 
deserved praise : King Ja [mes ] made choyce of him for a Instrument to 
imploy abroad: his loyalty, and Religion shal stand as a Rock agaynst false 
accusacions. 

Mr. Coke:'' he that shal consel to weken Religion is an enemy to 
Religion: he that will weaken the State: an enemy to the Kingdome. 

Sir H[enry] Vane: with as trobled a Sole as any man. I shal never 
condeme any man upon Jelosies : or except the fact be proved : when the 
particulars shal be debated: he will be able to acquitt himself: I never 
found man in Religion more clere nor more true: I speke not of these 
circumstances: his wife and children. And in that respect heretofore we 
delivered him not soe much as for a suspected man. If I cold tell you as 
well what to do as not to doe, I shold be happy to come of [f] this Rock. 
If to vote this would advance any thing to a quiett conclusion of this 
Parliament] I shold consent, but this not the way: Lett Mr. Speaker 
goe to his Majestic. To think of some forme to send to the King: and to 
present something by which wee shall agree upon to work our peace. 

Sir John Eliott: that he onely feared our interruption came by the 
person of that great man. Moved that the Speaker wold present to the 
King the scope of our loyall intention. 

Mr. Littleton. Every man ready to lay down lives and fortunes at 
his Majesties feete: yet withall let us not leave behind us that honesty 

b Clement Coke. March Second account (p. 263). 



March 2 CROSVENOR'S DIARY 243 

which every man ought to carry: whoever shal be an instrument to inno- 
vate in church or reHgion: or imposition of taxes more then lawfull to 
declare that man an enemy to the State. 

Mr. Long: that man, marchant, that shal give away my inheritance 
to vote him a capitall enemy to the State and Kingdome. 

Mr. Selden.2 If you our Speaker will not putt to question at our 
command, then according to a particular command brought this house 
by you we shal never doe any thing but according to that particular com- 
mand: you refuse to be our Speaker. And in that regard the paper to be 
given to the Clerk to be read. 

Sir Dudley Diggs. To adjorne: in obeydience he had hetherto held 
his tongue. 

Sir Robert Phillips: That God wold keep the King from ill coun- 
sells and counsellers: If that great man be giltey, he will bee a means to 
work with the King : that he may be tryed here. 

Mr. Hollis. Noe man meant to vote any thing agaynst any par- 
ticular person but in general: whoever shall consell, or shalbe an actor in 
taking the Subsidy of Tunage before a Law: he shal be declared a Capitall 
Enemy to the State. What marchant so ever shal pay without a law to 
declare him a betrayer of the liberty of his country. 

Sir Tho[mas] German. That the messenger who came for the 
Serjant from the King stayed at the dore, and marvelled there was no 
answere. 

Mr. Wansford. Judge of one anothers reasons without prejudice to 
the persons of one another. 

Mr. Speaker. Acknowledged the trust reposed in him to give him 
leave to goe to the King wherein he wold deale really and cordially and 
faithfully. 

Sir Pe[ter] Hamond: I am sorry he is a Kentish man thus to 
pluck up our Liberties by the Rootes: not to goe before we have righted 
our selves agaynst him. 

Mr. Maxwell sent by the King to the Speaker: but not suffered to 
come in. 

Mr. Hollis : offered to read what he had written. 

First: who ever shal bring in any innovacion in religion: as namely 
Arminianisme shal be accounted a Capitall Enemy to the King and King- 
dome. 

Who shal counsell the King or be an actor or instrument in taking 
tunnage and poundage till an act of Parla[ment] Capital Enemy. 

2 Above this name was written and then crossed out. Sir Robt. Pye. According to the March Second 
account Pye spoke between Long and Selden. 



244 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 March 2 

What marchant soever shall pay shal be held a betrayer of the Liberty 
of the Kingdome. 

Sir Nat[haniel] Rich. That if the message by Mr. Maxwell were 
to the Speaker then to adjorne: if to the house then we must sitt. 

Sir Fr[ancis] Seymer: To adjorne. 

The Court adjorned till 9 of the clock: to morrow sevenight. 

The 10th of March: The king in person dissolved the parlament 
being in his Crowne and Robes. 



NETHERSOLE LETTERS 

May it please yoiir Majesty 

If I did not thinke the diverting of your thoughts from your 
griefe* to be the best way of comforting you in it this should not tell your 
Majesty that the Parliament began agayne on Tuesday last as now ap- 
poynted but that the King your brother came not to the house as is usual!. 
The very next day in the house of commons they began to complayne that 
the Petition of Right granted the last Session had beene already invaded 
in all the partes thereof; that of mens persons by the imprisonment of a 
marchant without showing a lawfuU cause and the difficulty used in grant- 
ing him his Corpus habeas, that against the use of martiall law by the 
taking of a mans eares off by a sentence in the Star Chamber, being an 
arbitrary law and having no power of life or limme, that of the property 
of mens goods by the seizure of the wares of divers marchants for refusing 
to pay the customs and Impositions there being no law to demand them, 
and the refusing of the grant of a writ of replevin when it was demanded.** 
Upon these grounds they were going on further the next day and got heate 
in going, when Mr. Secretary Cooke by a message from his Majesty 
wished to forbeare further speech thereof till this day" on which at two of 
the clocke afternoone both houses should attend his Majesty in the ban- 
quetting house at Whitehall. They have done so*^ and there the King 
your brother taking notice of these complaynts hath declared that as 
for tunnage and poundage as he had not thought of taking it by the pre- 
rogative or by any other right, then of the gift of his people, so he assured 
himselfe that it was onely for want of time that they had not given it to 
him the last Session,^ and that if they woiild do it now, as he doubted not 
but they meant, they might thereby put an end to any dispute about it, 
wishing them in conclusion not to be too easy in beleeving rumors of him 
no more thanks would be of them, that this Parliament begun with a 
mutuall confidence might have a happy conclusion. 

This speech hath given great satisfaction at the present. I pray God 
it hold out to the end of this meeting. 

The House of Commons doth also shew to be much discontented with 
the printing of the Petition of Right with the severall answeares given 

" Nethersole refers to the death of the Prince of Bohemia. See Beaulieu's letter to Sir Thomas Pick- 
ering in Court and Times of Charles I, 2:7. 

b Nethersole was giving an abstract of Selden's speech. 

<: Secretary Coke's message from the King came on the 23rd not on the 22nd as Nethersole would imply 

d Nethersole was evidently writing on the evening of the 24th. 

e If the King were courteous enough to wait for their grant, they should be courteous enough to make 
it. The King clearly implied — wheth^ he meant to do so or not — that it was a favour on his part to wait, 
a position subversive of the very thing'.for which the Commons were standing. 



246 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 

thereunto, and his Majesties speech the last day of that Session, the 
rather because it was at first printed with this answeare onely, Droit soit 
fait comme il est desire. And that impression afterward suppressed. But 
that which troubleth them most is the recording of that last speeche of 
his Majestyes in the Clarkes booke of our house since the making of that 
recesse both which his Majesty doth take on him to have beene done by 
his commandement^ yet will they hardily rest satisfy ed therewith. 

In matter of Religion they are quiet as yet for it is early dayes. But 
the greatest business is like to be about that notwithstanding that his 
Majesty hath called in Montagues booke by a speciall proclamacion which 
I herd your Majesty [blurred]. His Majesty had also granted his pardon 
to Montagu, Cosens, Mainwaring and Sibthorpe. But that will hardly 
save some of them. God keepe us in good temper. 

Your Majestys most obedient and most faythful humble 

Servant Nethersole. 

My Lady Montgomery is fallen sicke of the small pox, whereupon your 
sister is this day removed in haste to Somerset house. 

May it please your Majesty. 

With this your Majesty shall receyve a copy of the speeche 
the King your brother made to both houses on Saturday last the effect 
whereof I put in my letters of that day, but his Majesty having after- 
wardes sent a copy thereof to the Speaker of the House of Commons, for 
that circumstance though for no other I suppose your Majesty will be 
desirous to read it. In pursuance of that speech of his Majestyes on 
Monday last the bill of Tunnage and Poundage was brought into the house 
by Mr. Secretary Cooke who desired it might then receyve the first read- 
ing. But that which at the first propounding seemed a very reasonable 
and passable motion abode a long debate, and was at last overruled upon 
this reason that that bill is in truth as it is intituled a bill of Subsidy and 
that therefore the matter thereof ought to be resolved on in the house before 
the bill were brought in as in other bills of subsidy es it useth to be. The 
rest of that morning was spent in the hearing of Ihe complayntes made of 
the shippes which are ready to go for Spayne laden with corne, fish etc. 
(the consideration whereof was referred to a select Committee) and other 
complayntes of the growth of Arminianisme and Fopery, the consideracion 
whereof was putt of to the Committee for Religion which was to sit that 
afternoone. Then some entrance being made irto the matter of Armini- 
anisme it was thought fit that the Remonstrance made the last Session 
should be renewed because one branche whereof concemeth Arminian- 
isme. By occasion whereof it came to be knowne that that Remonstrance 

' Cf. Lowther's account for Jan. 23 (p. 9, note b). 



NETHERSOLE'S LETTERS 247 

was by his Majestys commandement taken from the Clarke and deHvered 
to my Lord Privy Seale. This was conceyved to be so great a violation 
of the priveleges of the House that it was soone resolved to stay all further 
proceedings till that Remonstrance being a Record might be had. The next 
morning it was brought into the House by Mr. Secretary Cooke and there 
delivered with a message that the King expected the House should presently 
proceede with the bill of Tunnage and Poundage. But that message fell 
to the ground because it was ordered before that the matter of Religion 
should have the precedence before all other and the rest of the morning 
was spent in some generall speeches concerning the manner of the pro- 
ceeding in the matter of Religion and in agreeing of a Petition wherein the 
Lords and Commons joyne for the having of a generall fast throrought 
the kingdome, in speaking whereof Sir Robert Philips gave for one cause 
the losse of your Majestys Sonne and by that occasion spake in little 
much to his prayse. That Petition was this day delivered to his Majesty 
by Committees of both Houses, and granted but with these two notes 
that the desolation of the Reformed churches abroad (which is a principall 
reason for the desir of this fast) required rather fighting then fasting and 
that his Majesty will not hereafter have it goe into a custome that every 
session must begin with a fast. I had almost forgotten this mornings 
worke. For when the house was ready to be resolved into a committee 
to take in hand the matter of Religion, Mr. Secretary Cooke delivered 
another Message from the King whereby his Majesty taking notice of the 
putting of the bill of Tunnage and Poundage by pretence of an order m'ade 
for the giving of the first place to matters of Religion, required us not- 
withstanding to go presently in hand with that bill and withall let us know 
that he had already done so much in the matter of Religion that he ex- 
pected rather thankes for it, then a Remonstrance, yet forbad not this 
House to proceede in that, neither so that they keept themselves within 
their boundes and meddled not with that which belongeth not to them. 
Hereupon it was thought fit to returne an answeare to this message and 
divers heades of that answeare having beene propounded the penning of it 
was referred to a speciall Committee who are to bring it in tomorrow 
morning. God send it may be such as may give his Majesty satisfaction 
and be a meanes to stay all future messages sithence no one thing doth 
more retard his Majestys service and diminish his authority. So I humbly 
take leave. 

Your Majesty's most obedient faythfull and humble servant 

F. M. Nethersole. 
Westminster, 28 Jan 1628, 



248 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 

May it please your Majesty. 

On Saturday last I sent your Majesty a briefe and hasty 
account of the proceedings in Parliament that weeke, and shall now do 
the like of this. Some of my letters to the King in August last made 
mention of one Jones a stationer who when Montagu the now Bishop of 
Chichester was to be confirmed made some opposition thereunto. That 
your Majestic may the better understand it, and much is like to be done 
thereupon in this Parliament, I must trouble you with a summary relation 
of the manner of making Bishops in these times, which is this way. A 
statute made in the 25th yeare of Henry the eight and revived in the 8th 
of Queen Elizabeth it is ordered that when a Bishopricke is voyd the 
King shall write his letters to the Deane and Chapter of the Cathedrall 
Church giving them leave to chuse a Bishop as used to do in ancient times 
and these letters are therefore called a Conge d'elire but with them the 
King sendeth another missive by which he nominateth unto them some 
man for to be elected and although they proceede in the election with the 
auncient ceremonyes yet are they by that statute bound to make choice of 
that man so nominated by the King and of no other. After this notice 
is given to the Archbishop of this election, and by those statutes the Arch- 
bishop is bound to confirme the man so elected within twenty dayes, or 
els he incureth a premunire. Notwithstanding in this also it hath beene 
thought fit to retayne in part the ancient Ceremonyes. For the Arch- 
bishops Commissary doth make a solemne proclamation at Bow Church 
that whereas such a man is to be confirmed Bishop to such a church, if 
there be any man that can shew any cause either in his life or his doctrine 
why he is not fit to be confirmed a Bishop that he should there particularly 
declare it. which being a mere frivolity there hath not beene any excep- 
tions taken to any Bishop since that time of King Henry (if there be 
record of any before) untill that Jones then came and presented in writing 
a formall exception to Montagu drawne up by an Advocate for having 
in his bookes taught doctrine not agreeable to that which is established 
in this Kingdome as he shewed in certayne Articles which are the same 
\sic\ have been heretofore prepared against him by two Parliaments. 
But the judge taking advantage of this that there was not an advocates 
hand to this libell proceeded to a confirmation Vv^ithout regard of this 
exception the true Reason thereof being that otherwise both he and my 
Lord of Canterbury had incurred a premunier. Jones hath now preferred 
a Petition to the House of Commons, wherein he complayneth hereof, 
and thereupon his counsell was heard on Sunday last, who sayd what 
they could to make good the validity of this exception, and thereupon to 
voyd the confirmation. But when they had done Sir Henry Martins \sic\ 



NETHERSOLE'S LETTERS 249 

soone shewed the contrary by many reasons, and this among others, that 
regularly the proclamation ought to be made at the Cathedrall Church, 
which is vacant, and the exceptions put in by somebody of that diocese, 
as a sheepe of the fiocke over whom the Bishop is confirmed paster, which 
Jones was not, notwithstanding the common lawyers are not satisfied 
with this, nor with all his other reasons, and therefor there is a day ap- 
poynted for the further debate of this matter which some of them study 
hard out of an apprehension of the danger our Religion may be in by this 
vast power encresed to our Kings, if God for answer [ ? ] should send us one 
of a contrary Religion, or if it be but by preferring of Arminians now. There 
hath been niuch sayd against them, and among other thinges the printers 
have preferred a Petition whereby they alleage that of late all bookes 
written against them have been suppressed namely one written by Bishop 
Carleton but others written in their favoiu: have beene licensed. There 
is now a Committee appoynted to draw the matter to some heads, which 
I will send your Majesty, as soone as they have done. In the meantime 
the Committee of the whole house proceede into Popery, and therein 
Dr. Moore hath in person under his hand writing accused the Bishop of 
Winchester, Neale, of the words and thinges mentioned in my last — 
one Dr. Marshall is also sent for with whom that Bishop is sayd to have 
held the like language. So is one Dr. Beard who being many yeares 
since to make the rehearsall sermon at the Hospitall, and there to repeate 
one of Dr. Alablasters in which he at Paules Crosse had preached some 
pointes of Popery Dr. Beard was dealt with by Neale then Bishop of 
Lincolne not to make any confutation of those poyntes and rebiiked for 
not having obeyed him therein. But we are now fallen upon another 
matter which is in March last. Mr. Secretary Cooke having discovered 
that there was a college of Jesuits secretly erected at Clerkenwell caused 
the house to be searched and there found ten of the Society, store of mass- 
ing vestments, a library, foumiture of a house marked with letters to 
shew it belonged to the Society, a Relique of the Ashes of Ignatius and 
divers papers by which it appeared that this college hade beene held at 
Edmonton about four yeares before, and now to Clerkenwell, where they 
had hired the house for three years, and gotten 400 a yeare toward the 
maintenance thereof of a founder and divers benefactors not yet discovered, 
it also appeared that they had there held a Congregation of Jesuites of 
this Kingdome that they held intelHgence with the Provinciall and Generall 
of their order, had receyved monitory es from him and whereby they were 
commanded to pray for the successe of a business of great moment, and 
much other evidence of their being a formall College living under rules. 
Mr. Secretary Cooke acquainted the King him self herewith who being 



250 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 

very sensible of the boldnes of this attempt commanded him to acquaint 
the counsell therewith, and the lords commanded Mr. Attorney to pro- 
ceed against the ten prisoners according to the law, to which purpose 
Mr. Secretary Cooke delivered him all the fore sayd papers by which it 
plainely appeared that they were Jesuites. But Mr. Attorney not follow- 
ing the business him selfe but recommending it to the care and pursuite 
of one Mr. Long a Justice of Peace gave him directions to indite three of 
them for Priestes and to offer the oath of allegiance to the other seven, 
upon refusall whereof they might afterward be indited. By this meanes 
whereas they might have beene all convicted for Jesuites which is no lesse 
Capitall then being a priest, one of them onely who professed him selfe 
a Priest was condemned, and he reprieved too, the other two were acquitted 
for want of proof e of their being priests, and the seven were all bayled upon 
slight bondes. Beside when Mr. Long at the sessions offered to give evi- 
dence against them out of the papers he had from Secretary Cooke he was 
not hearkened to, but held to the issue of Priest or not Priest by my Lord 
Chiefe Justice Richardson especially. This is understood by the House to 
have beene done of purpose to free the men, and as they suspect by higher 
direction, after which there will be a dihgent inquisition. I am very 
sory, for Mr. Attorney General Heath is much your Majestys servant. 
He was freed by the King on Munday last with this admonition that he 
should feare God and the King and none els, and now being fallen into the 
ill opinion of the House of Commons is in danger to be crushed between 
two rockes.s 

On Thursday last the matter of tunnage and pundage was taken into 
consideration and by that was then sayd it is easy to see that the House 
will give it to the King your brother without any directions in point of 
profitt, but not without a very full acknowledgment and declaration of 
the right of the subject, and cassation of all that hath beene done to the 
prejudice thereof either by the King your father or your brother. How 
this will please his Majesty I much doubt. I am sure he is much dis- 
pleased that there is no more hast made to passe the bill and yet since 

e There can be no doubt but that Heath was, at this particular moment, not only out of favor with 
the House of Commons but with the King as well. On Saturday February 7, he was confined to his 
chamber and not released until the following Monday (Hist. MSS Comn., 7th Report, app. p. 544, Robert 
Barrington. M.P. to his mother; Add. MSS 35.331. Walter Yonge: Diary). Yonge states that the "cause 
is unknown but that hee hath offended the King." Later he adds: "It is since reported that the King 
committed him for revealing some of his secretts." Heath himself in a letter written February 7 to Dor- 
chester begged the latter's intercession with the King. He maintained that he had no ill intention in 
what he did, and he promised to be more careful in the future t^Cal. St. P. Dom. 1628-29, p. 468-69). 



NETHERSOLE'S LETTERS 251 

Thursday there is nothing done therein, nor will be much till Religion be 
setled whereon the hearts of all the house are expressly set. 
So Humbly rest. 

Your Majesty es most obedient and most faythfuU humble 
servant 

Frac. Nethersole. 
Westminster this 14th Feb. 1628 

[On margin] Madam. The Lords have resolved on a petition to the 
King your brother for the putting of Irish Viscounts below English Barons. 
It was moved to have had their honors reserved : 



MARCH 2nd account 

[From the two copies of this accounta it is difficult to attempt to reproduce the 
original. One feels that the second is nearer the original in its phrasing. In Eliot's 
long speech where the two copies diflfer in sense it is this one which agrees with the Port 
Eliot MS. But from the end of that speech the handwriting is different and the 
copying so hurried as to be full of verbal omissions and mistakes. The first copy is 
much more wordy than the second. Where the additions add clearness to the narrative 
they have been put in the text, where they only improve the style they have been 
put in the notes. Repetition of differences which occur frequently have not always 
been noted, as the use of King in the second and his Majesty in the first. In dealing 
with such differences we have in general kept to the usage of one manuscript in 
order to gain uniformity. For example in the text the name only of each speaker is 
given though the second copy often preceded the name by then or followed it with 
said. But to have carried this uniformity to the extent of giving all the speeches in 
the first person would have destroyed the character of the narrative, for often the 
change was made in the middle of a speech. The narrative as here given is probably 
fuller than was any one copy. But if, as seems probable, the copies were all made 
at the time for the use of the judges,*' the additions which add substance or clear- 
ness all deserve a place in the text. ] 

2 MARCH 1628 

Prayers being readd,^ and the House settled, the Speaker told the 
House he had a message to deliver from his Majestie, which was^ as fol- 
io weth : 

Gentlemen,^ his Majestie hath commanded me to signify imto you, 
that it is pleasuFe,"* that this^ House bee agayne^ adjourned till tomorrow 
sevennight at 9 of clock,^ that in the meane time all proceedings in this 
House, and in committees to bee forborne: and soe asked if it were theyr 
pleasures, hee shoiild accordingly adjoume the house. ^ Whereupon there 
beeing a great Cry Noe Noe,^ Sir John Elliott standing up to speake, and 
many in the House calling upon him to speake, ^° and the Speaker still 
standing, signified agayn imto the House, that his Majestie had layed 

tended. 2. For abbreviations see note a below. 
2 Mr. Speaker beganne to say. 2. 
' Only in 2. 

* signify e his pleasure, i. 
Uhe. I. 

' agayne only in 2. 
'' at of clock, only in 2. 
9 and soe . . . , only in 2. 
'there . . . .only in 2. 
1° and many . , . , only in i. 

»St. P. Dom. 1628-29, vol. 138, nos. 6 and 7- These manuscripts will be referred to in the notes as 
I and 2. 

^ For a discussion of this account, see the Introduction (pp. Ixvi-lxvii). 



MARCH 2ND ACCOUNT 253 

an absolute command upon him,^^ that the House should bee presently 
adjourned, without any speech or other proceedings, and^^ that if any 
in the House did offer^^ to speake after the message delivered,^^ he 
should instantly*^ leave the chaire, and weight upon his Majestie.^^ That 
notwithstanding, there beeing a great crye, to have Sir John Elliott heard, 
and hee standing still to speake, Mr. Speaker offered to goe out of the chayre, 
but was held in by the Armes by Mr. Hollis and Mr. Valentine. But 
notwithstanding hee at length gott out of the chayre, and (divers of the 
House flocking up towards the table) hee was agayne with a strong hand 
by them two put into the chayre.^^ And when the House was agayne 
settled, ^^ Sir John Elliott (pretending to speake only to the order of ad- 
journement) sayd the like to this had never been donne^® in this House, 
but the other day. That it is^" the fondamentall liberty of the^^ House, 
that wee have ever adjo\imed^^ our selfs. That when the King sent his 
Comission hither^^ to adjoume us to Oxford, the House layed by the Com- 
ission, and adjourned it self. That there hath been some misrepresen- 
tation to his Majestic of the Course of our proceedings, that his Majestic 
may have been enformed, wee have trenched too farre upon the power of 
the Soveraintie: but wee have professed in all things^^ to obey him as 
the highest under God: And yet upon all such^^ occasions we have ever 
had interruptions,^^ when the honor and justice of the Kingdome hath 
bene in question: Nothing hath bene done amongst us, but that which 
is agreeable to his Majesties justice; and as he is just, so we doubt not but 
he doth justly intend to performe, what we shall desire of him.^'' We 
have for the present^^ onely prepared a short declaracion of our intentions, 

" the Speaker told them, that he had an absolute commandment from his Majestie, I. 

^^ that the house . . . , only in 2. 

13 any body off red. 2. 

1* after . . . , only in i. 

15 presently. 2. 

1' and weight .... only in 2. 

" Sir Jo: Elyot neverthelesse standing up still to speake, and many in the House calling upon him, the Speaker 
went downe out of the chaire, but was violently forced into it againe by Mr. Hollys and Ben: Valentine, the 
one sitting close to the chaire on the one side, and other on the other who taking the Speaker by the armes drew 
him into the chaire and many others flocking up towards the chaire to assist them. i. 

18 Where he being placed against his will. i. 

19 spake to this effect: Mr. Speaker, there was never the like of this done. 1. 

20 jt was. 2. 

21 this. I. 

22 used to adjourne. I. 
2' hither, only in i. 

2* but I hope, we shall in all things be ever ready, i. 

^^ small. I. 

2' interruptions have come in among us. 2. 

" can desire from him. 2. 

28 We have therefore. 2. 



254 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 

which I hope shall agree with the honour of the House, and the justice of 
his Majestic. And with that hee threwe downe a paper into the middest 
of the flower, from the highe ranke where he sate,^' desiring^" it mought bee 
read. Which beeing taken up and delivered to the Gierke," and called 
upon to bee read by a great Cry,^^ Mr. Speaker agayn stood up and told 
the House: That they had ever used upon a message delivered by the 
Speaker,^^ from his Majestic for adjoiimment, to adjoume without any 
fiirther speach after it i^^ And the Speaker persisting still in his resolucion 
to obey his Majesties command, was violently called upon by many to 
have the paper readd. He still desired the House not to presse him to it, 
but that they would consider what any of them would doe, if they were 
in his place, and that his desire to serve them faithfully might not be his 
ruine.^^ 

Mr. Kirton stood up and sayd, that this was^^ contrary to that which 
his Majestic delivered unto^^ us at Whitehall: He then told us,^^ that he 
would beleeve nothing of that which^^ was reported to him of our pro- 
ceedings here,^^ but by the whole House. He hath now certainly bene 
misinformed of us by some false reports, which hath begotten^" this 
message, and therefore would know by what warrant Mr. Speaker had 
delivered^^ this message unto us. 

Then sayd^^ Sir Walter Earle, the Speaker was wont ever to bring 
the Kings letter to the house^^ for his warrant, when he delivered any 
such message.^ 

Mr. Speaker thereupon giving assurance, that hee had the message 
from the King himself, thanked that gentleman, for giving him occasion, 
to acquaint the House, how carefull he had been upon the last dayes ad- 
joumement to looke into presidents, with intention that if this might have 
appeared different from the cours held in former times he might in all 

^> And with . . . , only in 2. 
"> and doe therefore desire, I. 
'1 Which being . . . t only in 2. 

32 Speaker. I finde that ever when a message hath bene delivered. X. 
" without . . . , only in I. 

^ Whereupon Mr. Speaker still persisting in his obedience to the kings commande, and repeating it, 2. 
'5 Kirton. Mr. Speaker, this is. i. 
38 sayd to. 2. 
*'' He . . . , only in i. 
»8 he would not believe what, u. 
'» of our . . . , only in i. 
*" may have begott. 2. 

« / would therefore know what warrant you had to deliver, i. 
«» Only in 2. 
*^to the house, only in i. 
*^ when he . . . , only in i. 
■ "Sir William Fleetwood took it up and brought it to the Chaire." Grosvenor (p. 240). 



MARCH 2ND ACCOUNT 255 

humbleness have acquainted his Majestic therewith.^^ I find one presi- 
dent 27° Eliz: when by the Queenes commaund signified by the Speaker, 
that the House should adjoume for a day, it did so, and the like a 2d time 
in that yeare.'' I find allso the like 1° Jacohi in the first Session; upon the 
Kings commandement an adjournement for a weeke.° Allso in the 3d 
Session of that Parliament a message was brought from the Lords that it 
was his Majesties pleasure, that the house should be adjourned, and so 
it was:*^ Allso againe in that 3d Session the Speaker delivers the Kings 
pleasure for an adjournement for a weeke: The Speaker, when they mett 
againe was chalenged for it, and he produced no letter for his warrant, 
but made answere, that as it could not be denyed, but the House had power 
to adjoume it selfe, so it was as true, that the King had a superior power, 
and that he had commanded this adjournement:' And so I finde it entred 
in the Clarkes booke.^® 

Then Mr. Corriton stood up and sayd. That this was^^ a thing 
never doon in this House before: That the speaker'^^ would offer to leave 
the Chaire notwithstanding the Commatmd of the House to the Contrary. 
That wee had all bene much^^ to blame for our disorder and himself 
amongst the rest, but Mr. Speaker most of all. That an unreverent 
woord of his Majestie was not heard amongst us all this while.^" That 
you Mr. Speaker ought to hear what men would speake and if they^^ doe 
speake unreverently then they may be afterwards^^ questioned for it, but 
you ought to put the question for the reading of the paper, since the House 
calleth for it.^^ 

Then Mr. Bellassis mooved that the Speaker if hee woould not put it 
to the question should come out of the Chaire and the House should 
choose another.^'* 

" speaker. To let the house see, that I have not bene alltogether idle in this time of adjournment, in inform- 
ing my selfe of what hath bene done heretofore in like cases, I have looked into many bookes and presidents to 
the end, that if I had found any to the contrary of that is now done, I might in all humblenes have informed 
his Majestie of it. i. 

^* 7 find .... follows i. 2 gives only the following summary: And soe by helpe of a paper Cited 
divers Presedents both in the time of Queen Eliz: and King James; by which it appeared that upon signification 
of the Royall pleasure by the speaker for Adjournement of the house, it had alwayes been obayed without dispute 
or putting to question. 

" Coryton. Mr. Speaker, it is. i. 

" you. Direct form throughout this speech in i. 

« bene much, only in I. 

•0 this while, only in i. 

" any man. i. 

52 afterwards, only in 2. 

" but you . . . , I. and so called to have the paper readde, in 2. 

5* direct discourse in i. 

*> Cf. D'Ewes, 373- D'Ewes gives but one instance in that year. 
"C/. C.J. 1:167. 

dC/. C.J. 1:331. 
"Cf. C.J. 1:375. 376. 



256 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 

Then Sir John Elliott sayd wee are all ready to obey^^ his Majesties 
Commaund, and to adjourne; but I desire, this declaracion may be first 
readd.^" 

Mr. Strode. I desire the same; that we may not be turned of[f] 
like scattered sheepe, as we were at the end of the last Session, and have a 
scorne put upon us in print ;" but that we may leave something behind us.^^^ 

Mr. Valentine. Mr. Speaker, be not you the ruine of the King 
and of us all in disobeying the command of the House ;^^ we are all the 
Kings faithfull Servants, and will dye at his feete; and we desire to have 
the declaracion readd. 

Mr. Hollis. Are wee a Parliament, or no Parliament? If we be a 
Parliament, and®" assembled here by the Kings commandement, and 
trusted by those that have sent us hither, you are our Servant; and our 
Servants and Officers ought to obey us; and therefore according to the 
command of the House, let the paper be readd, or put to the question.®^'' 

Sir Francis Seymor. If no man speake against the reading of it (as 
I heare no man, that doth) it ought not to be put to the question,' but to 
be readd without a question; and therefore let it be readd.®^ 

[Mr.] Clem[ent] Cooke, let it be put to the question.®^ 

Sir Peter Hayman. Mr. Speaker, you are but a^* meere Servant of 
the House; and therefore since the House requireth it,®^ you ought not to 
doe the King somuch disservice, nor the House somuch dishonour, as not 
to have it readd ; and therefore put it to the question.^® 

Sir John Elliott. Mr. Speaker, I speake both for the honor and 
order of the House: There hath bene a generall concurrence of desire 
to have this paper readd, and no man hath spoken against it: and it 

65 lue isiill all obey. 2. 

'6 From this point some speeches given in direct form in 2. 

57 Meaning thereby the words which your Majesty, in your own Person, spake at the ending of the last 
Session. Heath's Information (Rushworth 1:668). 

58 Therefore mooved thai the declaracion mought bee first readde. 2. 
^^ in disobeying . . . , only in I. 

60 a Parliament and, only in i. 

61 In place of you are our Servant . . . , in 2 is given then it is fitte our servants and officers should obey 
us, and therefore Mr. Speaker must putt it to the question. 

62 2 indirect and condensed. 
6' Only in I. 

^Uhe. I. 

^^ and therefore .... only in i. 

66 and therefore .... only in i. 

' The Speaker follows Eliot in Grosvenor (p. 240). 

8 Grosvenor (p. 240) adds "and that those that wold have it read shold stand up: and testify there 
consent." The Verulam MS (Xi) gives a speech by Strode very like this but placed much later in the 
proceedings. See True Relation (p. 105, note 17). 

•> Grosvenor follows Holies with a speech by Sir William Constable. 

i C/. Grosvenor (p. 240). 



MARCH 2ND ACCOUNT 257 

being the generall consent of the House, for you to refuse to put it to the 
question," I never saw a greater contempt and affront in Parliament. 
It hath bene well opened to you,*^ what you are to the House, and it is 
sufficient for you^^ that you are commanded by the House to put the paper 
to the question:^" I should be sorry that for this contempt and affront 
you should be judged a delinquent -J^ But if you shall still continue to 
denye the putting of it to the question, the next steppe is, that you be 
called to the Barre for not doing it : To avoyd that^^ p^^t it to the ques- 
tion, and if you do^^ it by the command of the House no doubt but it will 
satisfye his Majestic. 

About this time there was a confused noyse that the doore should be 
shutt and the key brought up; which the Serjeant being loth to doe, Sir 
Mi[les] Hubbert sayd, If the House would trust him, he would keepe 
the key of the doore, and see that no man should goe out. To which 
mocion many agreed, and he according tooke the key.''^ 

Mr. Speaker. Though I should hold it one of the greatest miseries, 
that can befall me, to be called to that Barre; yet I will readily undergoe 
any shame or censure you can lay upon me, if that will satisfye you. 

Sir Walter Earle. Mr. Speaker, you cannot be ignorant in what 
a desperate condicion^^ the whole Kingdome is:^^ and you know not how 
farre that which is in that paper may conduce to the helping of it, and to 
the service of his Majestie:^^ let it not lye upon your Conscience to hinder 
the reading of it.''* 

Sir Edward Giles. Mr. Speaker, I pray you lett it be read," and 
if any thing bee amiss in it*° lett them*^ answere it that brought it in. 
Protesting that hee knew nothing what was in it.*^ 

Then*3 The Speaker humbly besought the House, that they would 
give him leave to goe to the King: He had heretofore done them no ill 

'''for you . . . , only in i. 

M/o you, only in i. 

"/or yoM, only in i. 

'"> Instead of put the paper . . . , in i is given doe it. 

" 2 adds, and called to the Barre. 

''- and therefore you ought to. i. 

'3 After this had been written, it was changed to read, doe it and you doeing in i. 

'>* About this time . . . , only in I. Written in the margin 

" Case. 2. 

'6 Religion and the Kingdome is in. 2. 

" and to ... , only in i. 

'* If therefore you will not suffer it to be readd, it will lye upon your conscience, i 

" put the reading of the paper to the question, i. 

80 and if there be anything in it, that is amisse. i. 

81 him. I. 

82 Protesting .... only in 2. 

83 Here. i. 



258 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 

service by going to him in such a streight, and he will serve them now 
againe with the like fidelitie: and (saith he) if I doe not returne, and that 
speedily, teare me in pieces,^* and a various Cryes following of I and Noe.^^J 

Sir John Elliott. Mr. Speaker, That paper which was presented 
for your reading,^® when it had passed your view, I doubt not but it would 
not have bene judged otherwise but as befitting" the duetye^ and loyaltie 
of good Subjects: Therefore^^ if you still continue in yoiu-^° htmiour of 
not putting it to the question,^^ to vindicate the liberty of our posteritie, 
we must fall upon your person: and what man was ever blasted in this 
House, but a Curse at length^^ fell upon him ? And for that paper,^^ since 
you refuse to put it to the question, I shall move, that it^* may be returned 
to me^^ and I will deliver to the House^^ the substance of it, so as that all*^ 
the House, and all the world'' may know the loyaltie and affeccion of this 
House to his Majestic. ^^ 

Mr. Strowde. Mr. Speaker, you have protested your selfe to be our 
Servant, and^^ if you doe not what we command you that protestation of 
yours is^°° but a Complement: If you bee our Servant you must obey us 
for the Scripture sayth His Servant you are whom you obey. And after 
a little pause stood up and sayd Will you or will you not ? 

Mr. Speaker : I am not the lesse the Kings Servant for being yours : 
I will not say I will not put it"^ to the question, but I must say I dare not. 

Sir John Elliott: hearuppon pressing to have the paper, and coming 
down some stepps from his seat to take it, and having gotten it notwith- 
standing that many cried no, began to speake to this effect. ^''^ 

" desired that they would trust him as they had doon heartofore to goe to the King protesting that hee would 
retourne. 2. 

** and a various .... only in 2. 

^^tohereadd. i. 

8' would have bene judged, as a thing not ill befitting, i. 

8' only in i. 

8' Therefore, only in 2. 

*othat. I. 

" not to have it read. 2. 

*'^at length, only in i. 

"/or .... only in I. 

»* the paper. 2. 

*^ againe, added i. 

'5 to the House, only in i. 

" and so delivered it, that both. i. 

98 loyaltie of our affections, i . 

" and crossed out and but written instead, i. 
1"° we must take it. 2. 
"" the reading of the paper, i. 
'"s In I is given only, (the paper being delivered backe to him againe) sayd. 

' Grosvenor (p. 241) follows this with a speech by Mr. Godfrey. 

i" "that the King and world" Grosvenor (p. 241). 



MARCH 2ND ACCOUNT 259 

I shall now express that by my tongue, which this paper should have 
done: and I doe it with as faithfull a heart to the King, as ever any man spake 
in this House: The miserable condicion this Kingdome is in,^°' both in^"* 
matter of religion and policye, makes me looke with a tender eye both to 
the person of the King, and to the Subject: You know, how Arminianisme 
doth imdermine us; and how Poperie comes in upon us so open faced, as 
it gives a terror to the law: That particular concerning the plantacion 
of the Jesuites amongst us, and other things incident thereimto doe 
manyf estly show it :^°^ And not only those men who are actors themselves^"^ 
(I mean^°^ the Jesuites) ; but those that are their great masters and fautors, 
such as^°^ have power over^°^ the law, and dare checke the Magistrates 
in"" the execucion of their duties, from thence it comes that we suffer: 
It is the feare of punishment, that may befall them, that brings us upon 
this rocke : There are amongst them^"-^ some Prelates of the Church, That 
great Bishop of Winchester, and his followers : and what they"^ have done 
to cast an aspersion upon the honour, and pietye, and goodness of the 
King, hath bene made apparent unto us.^^^ These are not all, but it^^* 
is extended to some others, who I feare in guilt and conscience of their 
owne ill desires, doe joyne their power with that Bishop and the rest, to 
draw from his Majestic a jealousie of the Parliament : Amongst them I shall 
not feare to name the great Lord Treasurer ; in whose person, I feare, is con- 
tracted all the evill, that^^^ we doe suffer : If we looke either^^^ into religion, 
or policye, I finde him building upon the grounds layd by the Duke of Buck- 
[ingham] his great Master. From him I feare came those ill counsells 
which contracted^^^ that imhappie conclusion of the last Session of Parlia- 
ment: And whosoever shall goe about to breake Parliaments, Parliament 
will breake him: I find this not onely in the affections of his"^ heart, 
but allso"^ by relacions made unto him, I finde him to be^^o ^j^g ^ead of 

loj yie are in. 2. 

n>«/or. I. 

105 make it evident, i. ' 

'"* A«(i it is not those men alone that are the actors themselves, i. 

1" Only in 2. 

»« they. 2. 

>(" of. 2. 

^iOfor. I. 

"1 There be in this. i. 

^i'- that Bishop. 1. 

^'^ hath .... only in I. 

"< This is not all, but this crime, i. 

115 all that which. 2. 

"' either, only in i. 

1" and from him, and his evill Counsells, and from that feare was contracted, i. 

»» that persons. 1. 

>s» allso, only in 2. 

«8 he is. 2. 



260 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 

the Papists, they and their Priests and Jesuits have all relation to him-^^i 
and I doubt not but to fixe it indubitably upon him : and so from the power 
and greatness of that person^22 cometh^^^ the danger upon our religion : For 
matter of^^* policye; in the great question of Tonnage and Poundage, the 
interest that is pretended to be the Kings is butt the interest of that 
person ;^25 and this to undermine the policye of this^^® govemement, and 
thereby to weaken the Kingdome: It was the Counsell that^^^ Hospitalis 
Chancelor to Charles 9 of France gave that King i^^s that the way to weaken 
this Kingdome^29 was^^° to impeach the trade of it, and so to lay our walls 
wast and open i^^^ And I doubt not, but by the disquisicion of a few dayes 
to prove how that person labours this way^^^ to undermine us; that^^' he 
invites strangers to come in, to drive our trade, ^^* or at least to make our 
merchants trade^^^ in Strangers bottoms, which is as dangerous i^^^ And 
this is that which imprints (in us) this feare in his person ;^^^ and that makes 
him to misinterprete our proceedings^^^ to his Majestic to the prejudice of us 
and the whole Kingdome. ^^9 j^fow therefore it will be fitt for true English- 
men to performe their dueties, to show their affection to their Countrey,"° 
and their desire to preserve the safety both of King and Kingdome; and 
so^^^ to resolve to defend the sinceritye of our religion, and to declare our 
resolucions allso"^ for the defence of the right and libertie^^^ of the Subject, 
that we may thereby approve our selves to be freemen; and by our freedome 
may grow^*^ the more wealthy and able to supplye his Majestie upon all 

121 the head of that religion, all Papists, Preists, and Jesuites to be supported by him. i. 

"2 him. 2. 

^^ is derived, i. 

i2< matter of, only in i. 

"5 the interest of the King is Pretended, where the interest is the Officers. I. 

^^^the scratched out and our written instead in i. 

'" of, 2; of scratched out and that written instead in i. 

'28 In 2 was instead of gave that King. 

129 that for the weakening of this Kingdome the onely way. i. 

"0 was changed to is in i. 

"1 naked, i. 

i'2 his labours are. 2. 

^^how. I. 

^^*here, added afterwards in i. 

"'5 our merchants to trade. 2. 

156,7/. I. 

1" imprints in us this feare of him. i. ' 

"8 things. I. 

^'' to the Prejudice . . . , only in i. 

^^^ to show . . . , only in I. 

1^1 so, only in i. 

"'likewise, i. 

1" and liberty, only in i. 

i« Instead of that we may . . . , is given in 2, whereby we may declare our selves to be free men, and so. 



MARCH 2ND ACCOUNT 261 

occasions:^ And that we should^^^ declare all that we^*^ suffer, to be the 
effect of new Counsells to the ruine of the governement of this State: and 
so to make a protestacion against these persons/^^ whether they be great 
or subordinate, that they shall alP^^ be declared as capitall enemyes to 
the King and^^° Kingdome, that will persuade his Majestie to take Tonnage 
and Poundage without graunt of Parliament: And^^^ if any merchants 
shall willingly pay these dueties without consent of Parliament, they shallbe 
declared as accessories to the rest: And whensoever we shall sitt here 
againe, if I be here, (as I thinke I shall) ^^^ I shall declare my resolutions 
fully, ^^3 to^^^ fall upon the person of that great^^^ man. 

Mr. Corriton. Mr. Speaker, I doe not mislike, that you should goe 
to the King, as your selfe moved; but I would not have you goe yet, I 
would have the paper readd first :^^^ His Majestie hath neede of our 
helpe, and these persons, named by the gentleman that spake last,^^^ doe 
keepe it from him: Wee all came with a full purpose to give his Maj- 
estie^^^ Tonnage and Potmdage, and a further supplye^^^ allso, if it^^° should 
be needfull: (At which words, the greatest part of the House cryed, 
All, All) -y^^ But such things have bene^®^ put in amongst us now, as have 
heretofore bene judged treason ; to bring in the Kings commaunds, when 
complaint hath been made that^^' the lawes have been broken: shall every 
man that hath broken the Law, have the liberty to pretend the Kings 
commaunds ? Wee know that^^* in ordinary Courts of Justice, the Judges 
are swome that neither for the great Scale, nor little Scale to go^^^ against 

i*« allso, added afterwards in i. 

i« now, added afterwards in i. 

1*' men. 2. 

i» all such shall, i. 

160 King and, only in 2. 

1" that, added in 2. 

"2 {as 1 ... ), only in i. 

iH I will deliver my selfe more at large, i. 

>M to changed to and in i . 

166 great, only in 2. 

166 This sentence given in the third person in 2. 

1" by the . . . , only in 2. 

15' his .... only in 2. 

"'» supplies. 2. 

JlOflS, I. 

i'i Att which speech the House cried All All. Soe hee went on. 2. 

■" Things are now. 2. 

'M to pretend the Kings commands, when. i. 

1" Wee .... only in 2. 

165 they shall doe any thing, i. 
' So far this report of Eliot's speech follows closely point by point that given by Forster (2:240-42) 
though it is not nearly as full. What follows is not in the Port Eliot MS; the part similar to the Protesta- 
tions is contained, however, in Grosvenor (p. 242) and Nicholas (p. 170); his promise for the future is 
in True Relation (p. 104). 



262 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 

the Lawes; much lesse should^^® this Court the most transcendent of all 
others allow of any such answere;^" And therefore I shall move, that his 
Majestic may be entreated^^^ from this House to advise with his grave 
and good Councell, and to leave out those that have bene here noted to 
be ill Coimsellours for the King and Kingdome.^^^ 

Mr. Weston. Mr. Speaker, both as a faithfuU Subject to his Maj- 
estic, as a good Patriott to my Countrey, and as a dutyfull Sone to my 
Father, I shall adventure to make such a modest answere to those asper- 
sions cast upon that noble Gentleman lately named, as may befitt my young 
yeares: It is not much to be doubted but some things may be amisse in 
the Kingdome; if all things were well ordered, we should not neede to 
meete here so often as we doe : We have here in our consideracion humane 
lawes; which as they be many, so there is one eternall law of God, that we 
should love our neighbors as ourselves: Now what can be more unjust, then 
without true grounds to lay aspersions upon a noble person ? would any of 
us thinke it just to be done to our selves ? Those that doe these things doe 
breede greater breaches; in such assemblies, as these be, then those, who 
are unjustly taxed for it: Not onely his coiurses but his affections have 
bene here taxed; it is God alone, that knowes the heart: And if you will 
call to minde how his late Majestic made choice of him to be a peace- 
maker, and how he discharged that trust both at home, and abroad, I 
thinke, nothing of all that he hath been charged with, will appeare in him : 
Oiir gracious Soveraigne that now is hath made choice of him to serve him 
in a meaner place, then he did his Father; wherein he hath behaved him- 
selfe with that clearenes of fidelitie, that as it hath not bene hitherto heard 
of him otherwise from the voice of the people, so he hath especially served 
his Majestic, as a faithfull Subject: And I doubt not, but his loyaltie 
to his Prince, his fidelitie to his Countrey, and his true affection to religion, 
shall stand like a rocke against all suspicions; and that it shall truely 
appeare, that he hath a heart inflamed with a desire of the good of this 
Kingdome and Comonwealth: I doe therefore humbly desire, that you 
will not prejudge him, but thinke that he hath as faithfull a heart both 
to Church and Commonwealth, as any man that sitts here, till the contrary 
doe appeare: And this I have spoken, as having bene a better observer 
of his wayes, then others, who upon unsettled rumors and reports without 
groimd would cast these blemishes upon him.^^° 

^'o ought. I. 

•" this transcendent Court the highest of all others to permitt the Lawes to be broken. 1 

"' moved, i. 

'" unto him. 2. 

"» For this speech only, Spake effectually in excuse of his father is given in 2. 



MARCH 2ND ACCOUNT 263 

Mr. Clem[ent] Cooke. Certainly,^^^ whosoever will advise the im- 
posing of^^2 Tonnage and Poundage upon the people^^^ without gift of 
Parliament is^^* an enemy e to the Commonwealth: and that this great 
person hath done this, there are not light suspicions onely,^^^ but apparant 
proof es.™ 

Sir Hen[ry] Vane. I shall desire^^^ this House not to precipitate their 
judgement nor their Counsells:^^^ I make no doubt, but when these things 
layd to this great persons charge shall come to be debated, he will appeare 
to be cleare of them: For matter of religion, setting aside the circum- 
stances of his wife and some children, I thinke him to be cleare for his owne 
person: In former Parliaments when he hath bene presented here for 
his wife being a Recusant, he hath had the honor to be cleared: And 
whensoever I shall finde him to have an ill affection to Religion, I shall as 
freely give my vote against him, as any man that sitts here, notwithstand- 
ing all my former obligacions to him, or knowledge of him: And for that 
which hath bene moved, that either Mr. Speaker alone, or some few others 
with him may goe as messengers from this House to his Majestic, I wish 
it may be done; as one that shall still have hope, that some good may 
ensue of it, untill the fatall blow of dissolucion come.'' 

Sir John Eliot. I think not now of voting any thing against that 
great person; but have onely delivered my feare, that that breach which 
hath bene hitherto made amongst us, and which we now so much appre- 
hend, hath come by his practise; but my intencion was first to have it 
proved, and then after to vote it : And therefore I desire that the Speaker, 
and some other honorable persons neare the Chaire may faithfully repre- 
sent our desires to his Majestie; but that not to be done now, but betwixt 
this and the day unto which we are to adjoume, tomorrow sevenight.^'^^ *» 

[Mr.] Clem[ent] Cooke sayd here likewise that he intended not that 
any thing should be voted, till it were proved. ^^^ 

Mr. Littleton. Though we come all hither with loyall hearts to 
serve his Majestie, yet let us not be blamed, if we forget not those, that sent 

1" certainly, only in i. 

n^ will lay. I. 

»" Subject. 2. 

^"i* cannot but be. I. 

i'5 upon him, added in i. 

»'6 Desired. 2. 

1" This speech ends at this point in 2. 

1" more condensed and in the third person in 2. 

"» This speech only in i and there written in the margin. 

™ Cf. Nicholas (p. 170); Grosvenor (p. 242). 

" Cf. Grosvenor (p. 242), 

°Cf. Nicholas (p. 171). 



264 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 1629 

US hither :^8° And therefore whosoever he be, that shall either goe about 
to^^^ undermine Religion or governement^^^ or to lay any^^^ new imposicions 
upon the people without consent of Parliament, ^^-^ we shall not feare to 
call him^s^ an enemy e to his Countrey; but we would have no man named^^^ 
till some proofe appeare against him.^^^ 

Mr. Long. Nay, I shall say further, that^^^ that man, that shall give 
away my libertie, and my inheritance (I speake^^^ of the merchants), if any 
of them shall pay Tonage and Pondage without gift by ParHament,^^" I 
shall vote him that doth it to be a capitall enemye to the Kingdome.P 

Sir Robert Pye.^^^ Let us not goe so farre, as to inhibite any man 
to pay it, that is wilHng to pay it : If the Marchants will voluntarily doe 
it, let them doe it, and not be subject to censiire for it. 

Mr. Selden. This that hath bene this day in question^^^ concerneth 
the whole body of the House of Commons whether they be any thing at all, 
or no: I am not ready for voting any thing now; I heare some matters 
worthy of consideracion,!^^ Tq^^ j know them not: Therefore now^^^ to 
come backe againe^^^ to the question of not putting the question: Without 
doubt (Mr. Speaker) as you are otu- Servant^^^ you ought to put it,^" when 
you are commanded by us:^^^ If wee must^^^ proceede here according to 
the particular commaund brought to us^^" by you from his Majestic i^"^ and 
you will not putt it to question when you are commaunded,202 nothing shall 
bee henceforth doon amongst us but what and when you will.^o^ We are 

"" This part of speech only in i. 

'81 I am of opinion that whosoever shall. 2. 

'82 our was afterwards added before both Religion and government in i. 

i8» any, only in i. 

ii* without . . . , only in I. 

185 instead of we shall .... only is in 2. 

186 without naming of any man. i. 
'8' against him, only in i. 

188 If ay . . . , only in i. 
'89 meane, i. 

190 if any .... only in i. 
'9' Only the name in 2. 
"- This now. 2. 
i^^ of great moment. 2. 
'9< now, only in 2. 
'95 againe, only in i. 
'9« the Servant of the House, i. 
'9' the question, i. 
'98 the House, i. 
"9 must, only in I. 
^"o to us, only in 2. 
2»' from .... only in r. 

'"'- and that the House cannot put any thing to the question, but what and when you please, i. 
'o' voted or resolved here but by your direction, i. 
"Cf. Nicholas (p. 171); Grosvenor (p. 243). 



MARCH 2ND ACCOUNT 265 

called together by his Majesties great Seale; and he sitting in his throne 
giving us leave to chuse a Speaker, you were presented by us to the King, 
and you by him returned back to us ;"°* then wee begg of him our privileges, 
freedome of persons and goods.^"* and libertie of speach: all which (though 
it be meere matter of forme) he graunteth us: If then we have free 
libertie of speach, and you are our Speaker, and it be your duetye to put 
what we shall debate and resolve to the question (notwithstanding any 
private command contrary to what his Majestic hath publikely graunted 
us) ; what have you done in refusing to doe this, but indeede refused^"^ to 
be our Speaker: And it is agreeable to the liberties and orders of the 
House, that in this case, or in others (as if our Speaker should be sicke, or 
the like, as sometimes it hath happened) we should make choice of a new 
Speaker :2°^'i But for the present, all I shall move shallbe, that since you 
have refused to put the reading of this paper to the question, the Clarke 
may be commanded to read it.^°^' 

Here Sir John Eliot sayd the paper could not now be readd, for he 
had burnt it.^o^^ 

Sir Dud [ley] Digges moved that the House would adjoiune it selfe, 
to end all further dispute of that point for the present :2^° But for that 
honorable person that hath been named in this House, notwithstanding 
what hath bene sayd of him here,^" I shall^^^ ]^qI^ ■\^i^ cleare, till somewhat 
be proved against him. Whereupon some Hissed.^^^ 

Sir Rob[ert] Philipps. I thinke it will be the best course for that 
noble person (since he hath bene here named) ^^^ to desire that his actions 
may be sifted here, and that so he may be cleared in Parliament, which, I 
doubt not, but may tume to his greater honor.* 

Mr. Hollis. I think that Gentleman (Sir John Eliot) hath done very 
ill to burne that paper: But I am of opinion, that it should not be left 

so* slight diflFerences in phrasing in I. 

205 our privileges .... only in i . 

206 Instead of // i^en . . . , in 2 is given If now upon a particular commaund you refuse to putt the Ques- 
tion which you are required what doe you but refuse. 

2"' And it is . ... only in i. 

2"' Instead of. But for . . . , in 2 is given, and concluded that the Gierke mought read it. 

209 phrasing briefer in 2. 

^i" spake to adjourne. 2. 

^^i that hath .... only in i. 

212 (saith he), added afterwards in i. 

213 Whereupon . . . , only in 2. 

21^ (since .... only in I, and added afterwards. 

Elsynge, in The Manner of Holding Parliaments in England, p. 254-58, tells "In what cases a new 
speaker hath been chosen." No case given was like the present one. 

' "have Sir Jo[hn] Elliott to the Chayre and put the question." Nicholas (p. 171). 

» C/. Nicholas (p. 171). Following Eliot's speech Nicholas notes: "The Serjant of the house is 
sent for by the King." 

' C/. Grosvenor (p. 243). 



266 COMMONS DEBATES FOR 162Q 

to the liberty of any merchant to pay Tonnage and Poundage without gift 
of Parliament; but if any of them shall pay it, and thereby give away our 
liberties, I would have them declared to be enemyes to their Countrey.^^^" 

To this Sir John Eliot answered, That he gave that Gentleman great 
thankes for reproving of him for the burning of that paper ; and that of all 
the obligacions that had passed betwixt them, he held this for the greatest. 

Here notice was given to the House, that his Majestie had sent for the 
Sergeant: and Sir Tho[mas] Jermyn sayd, The messenger that was sent 
by his Majestie standeth at the doore, not without some wonder, why the 
Sergeant was not sent away,"' Sir Miles Hubbert having the key of the 
doore in his custodie.^^^ 

Mr. Wansford. Mr. Speaker, if it be free for any man here to lay 
aspersions upon any great person, I know not, why it should not be as 
lawfull to speake any thing freely in excuse of him, untill that which he 
is charged with, be proved against him: which I conceive at this time can- 
not be done; and therefore for the present I thinke it best to adjourne.^^^ 

Sir Peter Hayman. Mr. Speaker,^^^ j ^^^ sorry that you must be'^^' 
made an instrument to cut up the liberties of the Subject by the rootes: 
I am sorry you are-^° a Kentishman, and of that name, which hath borne 
some^^^ good reputacion in our CoMntveyP'^ The Speaker of the House of 
Comons^^^ is our mouth, and if our mouth will be sullen, and not speake, 
when wee would have it, it should be bitten by the teeth,^^^ and ought to 
be made an example : and for my part, I thinke it not fitt you should escape 
without some marke of punishment to be set upon you by the Housc^^^"^ 

Mr. Hollis. Since that paper is burnt, I conceive,^^^ I cannot doe my 
King and Country better service,^then to deliver to this House^" what was 

"5 Mr. Hollis . . . , much briefer in 2. 
2" To this Sir John Eliot .... only in i. 
2" For Adjournment, all that is given in 2. 
"8 Mr. .... only in i. 
219 the speaker is. 2. 
wo he is. 2. 
"1 some, only in i. 
'22 repute in that Country, 2. 
223 Hee. 2. 

^2* when we ... , only in I. 

22s Instead of, and for . . . , in 2 is given, and mooved that wee should not depart out of the house till we 
had given him some marke of punishment. 

226 Since . . . , only in i. 

227 to this House, only in i. 
" Cf. Nicholas (p. 171). 

•' The messenger had been waiting all the time that the last four men were speaking. See above 
(p. 265, note s). 

■" Cf. True Relation (p. 105)- Following Hayman 's speech both Grosvenor (p. 243), and Nicholas 
(p. 172), state that Mr. Maxwell was sent by the King to the Speaker but was not admitted. 



MARCH 2ND ACCOUNT 267 

contained in it,"^^ and so though with some opposition,'' readd the heads 
out of a paper written by him self; which were as f olloweth i^^^ 

1. Whosoever shall goe about to innovate^^o any thing in^^i Religion,232 
to bring in either Popery or Arminianisme, or any new doctrine^^^ contrary 
to that which hath generally bene taught and received by the unanimous 
consent of the Divines of our Church.^^^ let him be accounted^^s a capitall 
enemy e of the King and Kingdome. 

2. Whosoever shall Counsell the taking of Tonnage and Poundage 
without Act of Parliament let him be accounted a capitall enemye to the 
King and Kingdome. 

3. What merchant soever shalP^^ pay Tonnage and Poundage without 
Act^^^ of Parliament, let him^^s be accounted a betrayer of the libertie of 
the Subject, and a capitall enemye both to King and Kingdome.^^sy 

About this time notice was given to the House, that Mr. Maxwell was 
at the doore with a message from his Majestie. But he being still kept 
out, Sir Nath[aniel] Riche sayd, If Mr. Maxwell have a message from 
his Majestie, it is either to the Speaker alone, or to the House; if to the 
Speaker alone, let us adjourne, and then he may speake with him; but if 
it be to the House, we must heare him. 

So after some confused noyse and stirre in the House for a while. 
Sir John Eliot^ moved that the House might for the present adjourne it 
selfe; and so by the mouth of|^the Speaker it did adjourne it selfe till to 
morrow sevenight.** 

228 luas in that paper which was burnte. 2. 

'2» Instead of, and so . . . , in I is given which {as I remember) was thus much in effect. Then he readd 
out of a paper, as foloweth. 

230 by innovating, i. 

251 our, added in I. 

282 and, added in 2. 

2" or shall hould any opinions. 2. ' 

"* contrary to the receaved doctrine of the Church. 2. 

M» held. I. 

2'* presume to, only in i, and added afterwards. 

"' gift. I. 

238 allso, added in i. 

M« The second MS ends here. 
» C/. True Relation (p. ids). ) The opinion of the House must have been very evident though no 
formal vote could have been taken. 

» Cf. True Relation (p, 101-2). According to True Relation the heads were not only read but "allowed 
with a loud Yea!" 

■ Sir Francis Seymour, Nicholas^ (p.''i72); Grosvenor (p. 244). 
•• "The House rose up after they had sitten down two hours." True Relation (p. 105). 



APPENDIX 



COPIES OF SEPARATES FOR 1629^ 
The King's Message, Janiiary 23. 

Petyt MSS no. 538, vol. 18. 
The King's Speech, January 24. 

*St. P. Dom. Charles I, 1628-29; vol. 133, no. 1; no. 2; no. 3. 
♦Cambridge, Gg IV-13, f. 96. 

Add. MSS 22959, ff. 57-58 (Diary of John Rouse). 
Petyt MSS no. 538, vol. 18; vol. 9, 

Mr. Rouse's Speech, January 26. 
*Harl. 161, f. 157. 
*Harl. 3787, f. 140. 
*Sloane 2531. 
*Sloane 4155, f. 179. 

Sloane 4155, f. 181. 
*Sloane 826. 
*Stowe 361. 

*Stowe 156, f. 216 verso. 
♦Cambridge, Gg IV-13, ff. 101-2. 
♦Pamphlet printed for W. H., London, 1641. 

St. P. Dom. Charles I, 1628-29, vol. 133, no. 13; no. 14; no. 15. 

Petyt MSS no. 538, vol. 9, f. 68; vol. 18, f. 441. 

Add. MSS 22959, ff. 58-61. 

Tanner 72, f. 305. 

Ashmolean 830, f. 196. 

Mr. Kirton's Speech, January 26. 
*Stowe 361, f. 56. 
♦Sloane 826, f. 140. 
♦Harl. 2217, f. 85. 
Petyt MSS no. 538, vol. 9. 

Sir Robert Phelips's Speech, January 26. 

Petyt MSS no. 538, vol. 9, f. 70. 
The Petition for a Fast. 

♦Cambridge, Gg IV-13, ff. 97-98. 

Petyt MSS no. 537, vol. 25, f. 386; no. 583, vol. 9, f. 68. 

Mr. Pym's Propositions, January 27. 
♦Sloane 826, ff. 139-40. 
Sloane 4155, f. 174; f. 176. 
♦Had. 2217, ff. 85 verso-86. 

Resolutions of the House of Commons, January 29. 
Hari. 161, f. 174. 
♦St. P. Dom. Charles I, 1628-29, vol. 133, no. 15. 
St. P. Dom. Charles I, 1628-29, vol. 133, no. 27. 

'Only those marked with an asterisk have been collated. 



272 APPENDIX 

Sir John Eliot's Speech, January 29. 
*Stowe 361, ff. 57-58. 
*R. O., Roman Transcripts. 
*Thomason Collection, E 198. 
Petyt MSS no. 538, vol. 9. 

The King's Answer to the Petition for a Fast. 
♦Cambridge, Gg IV-13, f. 98. 
Petyt MSS no. 537, vol. 25, f. 387; no. 538, vol. 9, f. 68. 

The Declaration of the House of Commons, February 2. 
*Hari. 2217, f. 83. 
♦Cambridge, Gg IV-13, f, 98. 
Petyt MSS no. 538, vol. 9; vol. 18 (2 copies). 
*St. P. Dom. Chades I, 1628-29, vol. 133, no. 38. 

The King's Answer to the Declaration. 
Hari. 2217, f. 84. 
♦Cambridge, Gg IV-13, f. 99. 
Petyt MSS no. 538, vol. 9; vol. 18 (2 copies). 

Sir Richard Grosvenor's Report, February 13. 
Ashmolean 830, f. 198. 

Articles . , . concerning Religion. 
Lans. 491, ff. 29-31. 

Eliot's and Selden's Speeches, March 2. 
*Stowe 156, f. 218. 

Tanner 72, f. 328. 
*Sloane 2531, f. 122. 
♦Add. MSS 33468, ff. 20-21. 

Petyt MSS no. 537, vol. 25, £. 387. 

The Protestations, March 2. 

♦Sloane 1199, f. 83 verso. 
Petyt MSS no. 538, vol. 18, f. 154. 
The Agitation. 

♦Tanner 72. ff. 329-30. 



COPIES OF THE TRUE RELATION FOR 1629 

Manuscripts 

British Museum 

Harl. 833; 2234; 2305; 4264; 4295; 4619; 4702; 6056; 6255; 6800. 
Add. MSS 21993; 26634; 27878; 30926; 32473; 36826. 
Lans. 491. 
Harg. 299. 

Cambridge University Library 

MSS V-1; Dd 11-39; Dd XIII-35. 
Bodleian Library, Oxford 

Rawl. 107; 108; 109. 

Ash. 795. 

MSS English History, d 89. 

Queen's College, Oxford (one MS). 

Record Office, London 

St. P. Dom. Charles I, 1629, vol. 132, no. 45; no. 46. 

St. P. Dom. Charles I, Addenda, vol. 530, no. 10 (fragment). 

Inner Temple, London. Petyt MSS. 
No. 537, vols. 27; 29; 37. 
No. 538, vols. 9, 18 (fragment, A Continuacion). 

University of Minnesota 
Z 942.062. 

Private MSS belonging to 
Duke of Northumberland 
Lord de L'Isle and Dudley 
Duke of Manchester 
Duke of Bedford (Wobarn MS no. 197) 
Archbishop of Canterbury (at Lambeth Palace Library) 
Mrs. Trollope (3MSS) 
Marquis of Bute 
Mr. Gurney 
Lord Downshire 

Printed 

Diurnall Occurrences, London, 1641. 
Ephemeris Parliamentaria, London, 1654. 

Sir Thomas Crew's Collection of the Proceedings of the Parliament in 1628. 
London, 1707. 



CLASSIFICATION OF THE COPIES OF THE TRUE RELATION^ 

X group 

1. Add. MSS 32473 

2. Harl. 2305 

3. Harl. 833 

4. Add. MSS 27878 

5. MS in the Lambeth Palace Library 

6. MS belonging to Lord de L'Isle and Dudley 

7. Petyt MSS no. 537, vol. 27 

8. Petyt MSS no. 537, vol. 29 

9. Harl. 6800 

10. MS belonging to the Duke of Northumberland 

11. MS belonging to the Duke of Manchester 

12. MS belonging to the Duke of Bedford 

13. MS belonging to the Marquis of Bute 

14. Petyt MSS no. 538, vol. 9 

15. MSS at the University of Minnesota. 

^ group 

1. Sir Thomas Crew's Collection of the Proceedings of the Parliament in 1628 

2. Cambridge Dd XIII-35 

3. Harl. 4295 

4. MS belonging to Mr. Gumey 

5. Rawl. 107 

6. Rawl. 108 

7. Cambridge, MSS V-1 

8. Add. MSS 21993 

9. Ash. 795 

10. Add. MSS 26634 

11. MS belonging to Queen's College, Oxford 

12. Petyt MSS no. 537, vol. 37 

r group 

1. Diurnall Occurrences 

2. Lans. 491 

3. Had. 2234 

4. Harl. 4619 

5. Hari. 6056 

6. Harl. 4702 

7. Add. MSS 36826 

8. Add. MSS 30926 

9. Rawl. 109 

10. Cambridge, Dd 11-39 

1 In footnotes, outlines, and introduction, reference to the copies of the True Relation has been made 
by the group letter followed by the number of the individual copy. To this rule two exceptions have 
been made; where the reference has been to the whole group the letter alone has been used, where the 
reference has been to more than two copies which are within the same group and which have consecutive 
numbers only the first and last numbers connected by a hyphen have been given. 



APPENDIX 275 



11. Hargrave 299 

12. St. P. Dom. Charles I, Addenda, vol. 530, no. 10 

13. MS belonging to Lord Downshire. 

$ group 

1. Ephemeris Parliamentaria 

2. Harl. 4264 

3. Harl. 6255 

4. St. P. Dom. Charles I, 1629, vol. 132, no. 45 

5. St. P. Dom. Charles I, 1629, vol. 132, no. 46 

6. MSS English History, d 89 



TABLE SHOWING EXTENT TO WHICH COPIES OF THE TRUE 
RELATION HAVE BEEN COLLATED 

Not collated at all 

Three MBS belonging to Mrs. TroUope. 

Collated only for classification 
X12; rl3. 

Collated only for order and omissions 

X6-8,13,14; ^4,12; ri2; *6. 
Collated completely except for certain long speeches, etc; given below. 

All other copies. 
Collated for the following long speeches, etc. 

The King's Speech, Jan. 24. Xl,2,15; ^1; rl,n. 

Mr. Rouse's Speech, Jan. 26. Xl-3,5,10,11,15; ^1,3,10,11; rl,2,7,9,lL 

Mr. Kirton's Speech, Jan. 26. Xl-3,5,10,11,15; ^1-3,5-11; Tl, 2, 7,9,11. 

Petition for a Fast. XI, 2, 11, 15; ^1; Tl. 

Sir Walter Erie, Jan. 27. Xl-3,5-11,15; *1; ri-9,11. 

Mr. Pym's Propositions, Jan. 27. Xl-3,5-9,11,15; ^1,3,10; rl, 2, 7,9,11. 

Resolutions, Jan. 29. Xl-3,9,11,15; ^1,3; ri,7,ll; *l,3-5. 

Sir John Eliot's Speech, Jan. 29. Xl-3,5,10,11,15; ^1,2,7,11; rl, 7,9,11. 

The King's Answer to the Petition for a Fast. XI, 2, 11, 15; ^1; rl. 

The Declaration, Feb. 2. Xl,2,15; ^1; Tl. 

The King's Answer to the Declaration. Xl,2,15; ^1; Tl. 

Sir Richard Grosvenor's Report, Feb. 13. Xl-3,5,11,15; ^1; rl,2,7,ll. 

Whereas the Honourable . . . George Vernon, Feb. 14. XI, 2, 11, 15; Sfl; Tl. 

Articles . . . concerning Rehgion. XI, 9; ^1,3. 



OUTLINE SHOWING VARIATIONS IN ORDER AND OMISSIONS 
IN THE COPIES OF THE TRUE RELATION 

TUESDAY THE 20th OF JANUARY 
No variation. 

WEDNESDAY THE 21st OF JANUARY 

Omitted from *6. 
It was ordered . . . Petition of Right . . . Parliament. 

Given here only in Xl,9, 10,13; ^. 

Given at end of Jan. 28, in $2,6. 
And it was also ordered . . . Mr. Selden . . . accordingly. 
Mr. Selden made report . . . Majesties command. 

Given in all but *5, 10,11. 
Mr. Pym . . . 
Sir John Eliot . . . 
Mr. Selden . . . 
Norton, the Kings printer . . . 
Sir John Eliot , . . 
Whereupon he was called . . . was a warrant. 

Omitted from X14. 

THURSDAY THE 22nd OF JANUARY 

Omitted from X14. 
One Mr. Rolles, a merchant ... he would pay. 
Sir Robert Phelips. By this information . . . proceedings. 
Here Mr. Littleton made a short speech . . . omit it. 

Given only in XI, 10,13; ri,2,8,10; *. 
Secretary Coke desired ... be used. . 

Given here only in X15; ^5,6,10. 

Omitted from X2,4,6,8; r8,9. 

Given after Littleton in all others. 
Mr. Littleton , . . 
Sir John Eliot . . . 
It was ordered . . . Customs House . . . sent for. 

Given in all but ^5,12. 
Mr. Selden reported . . . copies be printed. 

FRIDAY THE 23rd OF JANUARY 

Given 2^st heiore It was ordered . . . Customs House . . . sent for, in ''If 1. 

Given just before Mr. Selden reported . . . copies be printed, in Xl-8. 
His Majesty sent . . . take notice. 

As in textin Xl-10,13,14; ^; Tl. 

As in note in Xll,15; rl,3-12; $. 
Upon which the House arose for the day. 

Given only in Xl-10,13; T2. 



278 APPENDIX 

SATURDAY THE 24th OF JANUARY 

Given just before Mr. Waller did inform . . . munition thither, in ^2,6. ■ 

Both Houses being met . . . in manner following : 11 

Given only in Xl-10,13,14. 
My Lords . . . The care . . . Amen. 

Given in all but X14; *, 

MONDAY THE 26th OF JANUARY 

Omitted from ^12; *2,6. 
Mr. Waller did inform . . . munition thither. 
It was ordered . . . 
Mr. Secretary Coke . . . 
Mr. Rouse ... let every one say Amen. 

Given in all but ■!>. 

As in note in XI 4. 
Sir Francis Seymour. If Religion . . . undone above. 
Mr. Kirton . . . This business . . . best herein. 

Asin text in Xl-10,13; ^; V. 

As in note in Xll, 14,15; $. 

Given just after Mr. Rouse . . . Amen, in ^. 

As in text given on Feb. 11, following Mr. Kirton. I desire . . . , in Xll. 
Mr. Sherland. We have . . . degree and quality. 

Given just before Mr. Kirton . . . herein, in *1. 

Given just before Mr. Rouse . . . Amen, in ^12. 
Sir Robert Phelips. I take myself . . . counsels. 

Given only in ^1-6,12. 

TUESDAY THE 27th OF JANUARY 

Given just before Sir Nathaniel Rich tendered . . . followeth, in Xl-8. 

Omitted from XI 4. 
A Petition . . . Lewis . . . for. 

Omitted from X8. 
Sir Nathaniel Rich tendered . . . Fast ... as followeth : 
Most Gracious Sovereign, It is . . . friends and allies. 

Given in all but X14; 'J'2,3; $1,3-5. 

Given aher It was ordered . . . conference . . . accordingly, in -^1,12. 

Given on Jan. 28, in <l>2,6. 

Given on Jan. 30, (preceding the King's Answer) in *2,3; T. 

Given here but dated Jan. 28, in *6,11. 
It was ordered . . . conference . . . accordingly. 

Given in all but Xll, 15; ^11. 
The King sent a message . . . effect he expected. 
But before this message . . . Committee . . . further. 

Given just before The King sent . . . expected, in ^1,4,12. 

Given both before and after The King sent . . . expected, in ^6. 

Given just after A Petition . . . Lewis . . . for, in ^5. 



APPENDIX 279 

Sir Walter Erle made a speech . . . the precedency. 

Asin textin Xl-11,13,15; *1. 

As in note in all others. 
Mr. Coryton. Let us not . . . debate thereof. 

Given just after Rouse on the 26th in X15. 
Mr. Pym. The hindrances . . . whole Kingdom. 

Given in all but *l,3-5. 

Given on Jan. 26 just before Seymour, but with the heading Mr. Pyms speech 
2y January 1628, in *1,12. 

Given at the beginning of February 2, in -^4. 

Given on Feb. 3, in *2,3,5. 

As in note in XI 4. 
It was . . . precedency . . . whole House. 

Given only in Xl-13, 15; *6; r5,6; f>. 

Given just before Mr. Pym. The . . . Kingdom, in *2,6. 

WEDNESDAY THE 28th OF JANUARY 

Given just before Sir Nathaniel Rich tendered . . . followeih, in *5. 

Given just before Most Gracious Sovereign. It is . . . friends and allies, in 
^6,10,11- 

Given just before It was ordered . . . conference . . . accordingly in ^3. 

Given just before Sir Thomas Edmonds . . . Parliament, in *8,9. 

Date omitted from 'J' 1,12. 
Secretary Coke delivered . . . put it off. 

As in note in XI, 3-8. 

Omitted from ^8-11. 

As in text in all others. 
Mr. Long. I cannot . . . diffident of us. 

Given in all but 'J'8-11. 
Sir Thomas Edmondes. I am . , . from Parliament. 

Given in all but ^10,11. 
Mr. Coryton. When men ... to his Majesty. 

Given in all but ^10,11. 
Sir John Eliot spake to the same effect. 

Given only in Xl-5,7-13; *1, 6-9,12; *. 
It was ordered . . . belongs not to us. 

Given in all but ^3,10,11; r2-4. 

THURSDAY THE 29th OF JANUARY 

Given just before The King sent a message . . . effect he expected, in 'i'6-11. 

Given here also in *6-9. 
The former part of the day ... a stay of them. 

Given in all but ^10,11. 
In the afternoon . . . Religion as followeth : 

Given in all but ^10,11. 
That we the Commons . . . differ from us. 

Given in all but ^10,11; *l,3-5. 



280 APPENDIX 

The House received ... in due time. 
Given in all but *8-ll; «i>2. 
Given just before /« //fg c//er«oo« . . . followeth, in ^1,12. 

SIR JOHN ELIOTS SPEECH 29th JANUARY 

Given on Jan. 26, 

following Mr. Rouse . . . Amen, in Xll,15. 
following Mr. Sherland . . . quality, in Xl-10,13. 

Given on Jan. 27, in place of Mr. Pym . . . Kingdom, in '^1,12. 

Follows Mr. P>'OT . . . Kingdom, in <i!2 A, 6-\\. See that speech for the varia- 
tions in placing of this. 

Given on Jan. 28, in place of Sir John Eliot spake to the same effect, in ri,5-12. 

Omitted from X 14; ^5; r2-4; *. 

FRIDAY THE 30th OF JANUARY 

Given just before The House received . . . in due time, in $1. 

Omitted from X15; r9. 
Upon this day a Committee . . . answered as followeth : 

Given in all but XI 1; ^1,12. 
The Kings Answer ... to both Houses. 

Given here but dated Jan. 31, in X4,6,7. 

Follo^-s Most Gracious Sovereign . . . a//ie5, in Xll,15; ^1,12; *2,6. 

Omitted from X14; $1,3-5. 

MONDAY THE 2nd OF FEBRUARY 

Given just before Secretary Coke reported . . . fleet to sea, in X15; *5. 

Given just after Secretary Coke. I said . . . accommodate it, in *4. 

Omitted from XI 1,14; ^1-3,12; Tl, 2,5,6,9-11, 13; 4>2. 
The lower House presented . . . which Declaration followeth : 

Given in all but XI 1,14; ^1-5,12; T; *2,6. 
Most Gracious Sovereign ... all possible satisfaction. 

Given at end of Jan. 28, in Xll,15. 

Given on Jan. 30, in *6. 

Omitted from X14; $1,3-5. 

TUESDAY THE 3rd OF FEBRUARY 
Given before Most Gracious Sovereign . . . satisfaction, in *2,5. 
Given before Mr. Kir ton. The two great bishops . . . preferred, in XI 1,14; 

^1,3,6-12. 
Gi\en ]n?.iheiore The Remonstrance . . . of his book, in X15. 
Omitted from ■5'4. 
Secretary Coke reported . . . fleet to sea. 
After this apology . . . House as followeth: 
Gentlemen, Your Declaration . . . shall find cause. 

Given on Jan. 30, following Upon this day . . . followeth, in <t>2,6. 

Given here but dated Feb. 2, in X13. 

Given just after Most Gracious Sovereign . . . satisfaction, in T, but dated the 

jrd of February in all but r5,6,ll. 
Omitted from X14; *. 



APPENDIX 281 

Sir John Eliot. Mr. Speaker ... in this House. 

Given in all but ^1,3,12. 
Mr. Speaker. This honourable person . . . consideration. 

Given in all but *1,3,12. 
Secretary Coke. I said . . . accommodate it. 

Given in all but '4'1,3,12. 
Sir Humphrey May. If you be . . . daily command. 
At the Committee for Religion 

Given only in X; $. 
Sir John Eliot. For the way . . . seek for proof. 

Given only in X; *. 
The Remonstrance ... of his book. 

Given only in Xl-8,10-15; *l-5. 
Mr. Kirton. The two great bishops . . . preferred. 

Beginning with this speech the rest of this day omitted from $. 
Mr. Coryton. The Declaration ... of all good men. 

Omitted from XL 

Given before Mr. Kirton. The two great bishops . . . preferred, in ^2. 

No variations for the remainder of this day. 

WEDNESDAY THE 4th OF FEBRUARY 
Group <J> Groups X, ^, r 

No variation for this day. Date given just before The Remonstrance 

. . . of his book in X4,6-8. 
Given just before Mr. Kirton. The . . 
. bishops . . . preferred, in XI, 3, 5,9, 
10,13; r. 
A petition was preferred against 
Cosin. 

Given in all but *5,11. 
Mr. Sherland made report .... 

. . Dr. Sibthorpe. 
Sir Robert Phelips. If ever . . 

. Majesty. 
It was ordered . . , done accord- 
ingly. 
Sir Robert Phelips made report 
. . . Man waring. 
Giren after Secretary Coke brought . . . 
March next, in ^5. 

THURSDAY THE 5th OF FEBRUARY 
Group <!> Groups X, ^, r 

No variation for this day. Date given just before Sir Robert . . . 

Manwaring in SE'4,6. 
Secretary Coke brought . 
March next 



282 APPENDIX 

FRIDAY THE 6th OF FEBRUARY 
Group * Groups X, *, r 

No variation for this day. Date given just before Report was made 

. . . as followeth in Xl,2,4:-8. 
Given just before Sir Robert Phelips 
. . . baggage-fellow in X3. 
One Witherington was petitioned . 

. . be sent for. 
The House being informed . . . 
Attorney about it. 
Given in all but *4. 
Given on Feb. 4, preceding 

Mr. Sherland made report . . , Dr. 

Sibthorpe in ■*6. 
Sir Robert Phelips. If ever . . . 
Majesty in *5. 
Report was made ... as followeth: 
Sir Robert Phelips . . . bag- 
gage-fellow. 
Sir John Eliot . . . 
It was ordered ... be sent for. 

Given in all but *10. 
It . . . Mr. Attorney . . . him. 
* Given in all but ^10. 

SATURDAY THE 7th OF FEBRUARY 
Group «> Groups X, *, r 

No variations for this day. 
A bill against . . . judicature. 
Mr. Kirton moved . . . Tonnage 
and Poundage. 
Given just before A bill . , . judicature 

in $3,5. 
No variations for the rest of the day. 

MONDAY THE 9th OF FEBRUARY 
A petition was preferred . . . to a committee. 

Given in all but X8. 
Mr. Speaker delivered ... in Cosins business. 

Given in all but X15; ^2,4,5,12; r9. 

Given just before Jones the printer . . . bishopric in r7. 
Sir John Eliot . . . 
Mr. Goodwin . . . 

Mr. Waller seconded ... to morrow morning. 
Jones, the printer . . . concerning the bishopric. 
Sir Henry Marten . . . 
Dr. Steward . . . 



APPENDIX 283 

Sir Henry Marten. I will endeavor . . . innitandum est. 
As in text in XI, 13. 

As in note in all but XI. X13 combines the two. 
X6 omits all following Mr. Waller seconded . . . morning. 

TUESDAY THE 10th OF FEBRUARY 
A bill was preferred . . . Summer Islands. 

Given in all but X8. 
Another bill was . . . ministers and magistrates. 

Given in all but X8. 
Mr. Rolles complaineth ... a mistake. 
The subpeona was read ... be read. 

Given in all but X6. 
Sir Robert Phelips . . . 
Sir Humphrey May . . . 
Mr. Selden , . . 
It was ordered ... to the House. 
A Committee of six . . . to attend this House. 
A general order . . . think meet. 

Given in all but X6,l 1,15; ^1; rl,8,10. 
The privilege of the merchants . . . the Star Chamber. 

Given in all but *1. 
Sheriff Acton ... of this House. 

Given in all but ^1. 
Mr. Long moved ... to the Tower. 

Given in all but *1; r7 (which gives Seymour's speech as Long's.) 
Sir Francis Seymour. That . . . further punishment. 

Given in all but ^1. 
Mr. Selden . . . 
Mr. Kirton. I came ... to the Tower. 

Given in all but X3. 
Mr. Littleton . . . 
The Sheriff is again ... to the Tower. 
Sir Benjamin Rudyard. There be . . . which is ordered. 

Given in all but X2-8. 

Given on Feb. 11, just before Mr. Sherland reported . . . was any warrant in 
^1,4,5,12. 
It was ordered . . . upon Friday next. 

WEDNESDAY THE 11th OF FEBRUARY 

Given in all but ^11. 
Mr. Selden . . . 

The copy of the bill . . , to-morrow morning. 
Mr. Selden moved . . . which was also ordered. 

Given in al but ^5. 
It was ordered ... of the House. 
It was also ordered ... for Sir Edward Coke. 



284 APPENDIX 

At the Committee for Religion 

Given in all but XI 5; ^2,4, 
Mr. Waller delivered a petition . . . and his chaplains. 
One of the printers said . . . get it licensed. 
Mr. Selden . . . 
This is referred . . . 

Mr. Sherland reported . . . was any warrant. 
Mr. Cromwell . . . 
Sir Robert Phelips . . . 
Mr. Kirton . . . 
Sir Miles Fleetwood . , . 
Sir Walter Erle . . , with Montague. 

Given in all but XI -8. 
It was ordered . . . the remedy. 

THURSDAY THE 12th OF FEBRUARY 
The Sheriff of London ... in the Tower. 
Sir John Eliot made the report ... of the Exchequer. 

Combined with Sir John Eliot. The merchants . . . by their goods and given on 
Feb. 11, just before It was ordered . . . the remedy in ^1,12, and given just 
before Mr. Wansford . . . to go in, in ^5,6. 

At a great Committee for Tonnage . . . in the Chair. 

Given in all but ^5,10. 
Mr. Waller delivered . . . to be undone. 

Given in all but '^5. 
Sir John Eliot. The merchants ... by their goods. 
Mr. Wanesford . . . to go in. 
Mr. Coryton . . . 
Mr. Strode . . . 

Sir Humphrey May. I shall speak . . . speak here again. 
Sir Thomas Edmondes. There is none . . . settle the Tonnage. 

Given just before Sir Humphrey May. I shall . . . here again in Xl-10,13,15. 
Mr. Coryton . . . 
Mr. Waller. It is not . . . threatened in this. 

Given in all but X8. 
Sir Robert Phelips. I think . . . these interruptions. 
Mr. Noy . . . 
Mr. Selden . . . 
Mr. Littleton. For the point . . . without petition. 

Given in all but Xll.lS. 
It was ordered ... in this business. 

GivefTon Feb. 13, just before Sir John Eliot made a motion . . . of the merchants 
in r7. 



APPENDIX ^ 285 

FRIDAY THE 13th OF FEBRUARY 
A petition was preferred . . . 
It was ordered ... 

Sir John Eliot made a motion ... of the merchants 
It was ordered . . . 
A committee was also appointed . . . cause depending here. 

Given in all but X6. 
In the mean time . . . against the merchants. 
Sir Humphrey May . . . 
It was ordered . . . 
Dr. Moore, concerning . . . 
Dr. Moore is to deUver . . . 

At the Committee Jor Religion Mr. Pym in the Chair 

Given in all but *2,6. 
Sir William Bulstrode . . . 
Mr. Coryton . . . 
Sir Richard Grosvenor reports , . . hath been therein. 

AsintextinX9,ll; ^1-3,7-9,11,12; ri,3-12; <!>. 
Mr. Pym. In this . . . notice thereof. 

Given in all but r3, 4; *. 

Given ]\x?,t heiore At the Committee for Religion . . . Chair in "Jfll. 

Given on Feb. 14, just before Sir Humphrey May delivereth . . . Commons, as 
followeth, in r8. 
Sir Robert Phelips. If ever ... be past recovery. 
Mr. Coryton . . . 
Mr. Selden . . . 
Secretary Coke . . . 
It was ordered . . . against Recusants. 
Mr. Long . . . 
It was moved that Secretary Coke . , . business. 

Given only in Xl-5,7,8,10. 
Secretary Coke saith . . . from his Majesty. 

Given in all but X6. 
One Cross, a pursuivant . . . against Recusants. 
Ordered that Sir Thomas Hobby . . . after this business. 

Given only in ^4-6. 

Given just before It was ordered . . . against Recusants in '^6. 

SATURDAY THE 14th OF FEBRUARY 

Given in all but X8. 

Repeated before Whereas the Honourable . . . George Vernon in ^2. 
A complaint was made . . . 
It was ordered ... 
Sir John Ipsley . . . 
Mr. Selden . . . 



286 APPENDIX 

It was ordered that Sir John Ipsley . . . have leave. 

Given in all but X2, 6-8,15. 
Sir Humphrey May stiffly ... of Mr. Selden. 

Given in all but X6. 
Mr. Secretary Coke. I am as careful . . . Commonwealth. 

Given in all but X6; ^8. 
It was ordered . . . consider of this. 

Given in all but X6,ll, 13, 15; ^8,9. 
Sir Humphrey May delivereth . . . Commons, as foUoweth: 

Given in all but X13. 
Whereas the Honotirable . . . George Vernon. 

Given in all but XI 3; «». 
Mr. Kirton. We looked . . . Court of Exchequer. 

Given in all but X13. 
It was ordered ... of the Exchequer. 

Given in all but Xll,13,15. 

Given just before Mr. Kirton. We looked . . . Exchequer, in XI- 10. 
Mr. Selden. We have delayed . . . ordered accordingly. 

Given in all but X13. 

At the Committee J or Religion 

Given in all but Xll, 13,15; ^1,2,7-12. 
Sir Thomas Hobby reported . . . they were discharged. 

Asin text Xl-11,15; ^. 

As in note T; *. 
Sir Nathaniel Rich. I am confident . . . Majesties direction. 

Given in all but XI 3; >J^8,9,11. 

Given at the end of Feb. 13, in Xl-10,15. 

Given just before Sir Thomas Hobby reported . . . they were discharged in Xll. 

Given on the 16th following Sir John Stanhope in X15. 
It was moved . . . knowledge in this. 

Given in all but Xl,3,7,8,13,15; ^7-11. 
Secretary Coke thereupon made a long ... to Mr. Long. 

As in text in X; ^. 

As in note in T; *. 

Given just after Mr. Secretary Coke. I am as careful . . . Commonwealth 
in X13. 
Sir Francis Seymour taxed ... to Mr. Long. 

Given in all but X2,4,6-8; ^8-11. 

Given in an appendix in X9. 

Given on Feb. 16, following. It was ordered . . . proceeded against in Xll. 

Given at end of regular proceedings for Feb. 16th in X15. 
Cross the pursuivant . . . the Council-board. 

Given in all but X2,4,6-8; *8-ll. 

Given in appendix in X9. 

Given on Feb. 16, in XI 1,15. 



APPENDIX 287 

Sir John Eliot. In all this ... of these men. 

As in text in X; '^. 

Given just before Sir Francis Seymour taxeth . . . to Mr. Long in XI, 3, 9, 10, 13; 
^1-7,12. 

As in note in T; *. 
Mr. Recorder is ordered ... in the Chair. 
Secretary Coke saith . . . the condemned priest. 
Sir John Eliot. I doubt . . . him advice therein. 
Sir Nathaniel Rich. The Jesuits . . . and countenancers. 

These four paragraphs given in all but ^8-11. 

Given on Feb. 16, in XI 1,15. 
Mr. Long saith . . . amongst themselves. 

Given in all but Xll,15; '^S-ll. 
Mr. Selden saith . . . done in it. 
The further examination ... a select committee. 

These two paragraphs given in all but ■^8-11. 

Given on Feb. 16 in Xll,15. 

MONDAY THE 16th OF FEBRUARY 

Given just before Sir Francis Seymour made report . . . last he did in ^4. 
Sir Henry Marten made report ... his Majesty immediately. 
Sir Francis Seymour made report . , . last he did. 
The answer was read ... as followeth : 
I did receive . . . to be bailable. 
It was ordered . . . proceeded against. 

These five paragraphs given only in X; *. 
Mr. Selden reported that he . . . read but one. 

As in text in Xl-11,15; ^. 

As in note in X 13; T; *. 

G\\en ]Mstheiore It was ordered . . . Justice Crook in T; *. 

Given at end of day in X13, 
Sir Robert Phelips ... be parties. 

Given in all but ^11; T; *. 
A petition of complaint . . , own private use. 

Given in all but X8; ^. 

Given on Jan. 27, following Sir Walter Erie in X15. 
Sir Henry Marten . . . counted a Jew. 

Given in all but X8 ; ^. 

Given on Jan. 27 in XI 5. 
This was referred . . . Courts of Justice. 

Given in all but X8,15; ^; r7,ll. 

At the Committee for Religion 

Given in all but X15; ^; T2. 
Mr. Strode moved ... to the contrary. 

Given in all but XI 5; *. 



288 APPENDIX 

Sir Humphrey May. This was ... for his proceedings. 

Given in all but X15; <k. 

These last five paragraphs given on Feb. 20, just after A petition of complaint 
. . . Courts of Justice in Xll. 
It was ordered . . . and Justice Croke. 

Given in all but Xll, 15; *. 

These last six paragraphs given in appendix in X9. 

TUESDAY THE 17th OF FEBRUARY 

Given just before Mr. Selden reported that he . . . read but one in XI 1,15; 'i'1-3,5-12. 

Given just before Sir Thomas Hobby reported from . . . in his hand in *4. 
Mr. Chambers preferred . . . James his time. 
Sir John Eliot. You see . . . their own goods. 
It was ordered . . . the former Committee. 

These three paragraphs given in all but ^10,11. 
It was ordered ... a Committee of six . . . in the morning. 

Given in all but XI 1,15; ^10. 

Given just before Sir John Stanhope . . . to say mass in X9. 

Given just after Sir John Stanhope . . . to say mass in XI -8. 
It was ordered that . . . here in vain. 

Given in all but Xl-8,1 1,15; *10. 
The House sent . . . effect as followeth. 

Given only in Xl-10; ^10. 
Sir Thomas Hobby reported from ... in his hand. 
Mr. Wansford reported . . . the persons priests. 

Summary of these two reports in reverse order in ^10. 
Sir Thomas Barrington delivered . . . there at all. 

Given in all but 'J' 10. 
Sir Miles Fleetwood delivered . . . there at all. 

Given in all but *8, 10; r7; ^l. 

Given just before Sir Thomas Barrington . . . there at all in X6. 
Sir William Constable delivered . . . Justice Croke. 

Given in all but ^10; T2A. 
They were all different ... to the House. 

Given only in Xl-10; S^IO. 
Sir Thomas Barrington saith . . . or no priests. 

Given in all but Xl-8; ^10. 

Given just before They were all different . . . to the House in X9,10. 
Sir Nathaniel Rich ... in the Cotirt. 

Given in all but ^10. 
It was ordered . . . Thursday morning. 

Given in all but ^10; T5. 
It was further ordered . . . country they be. 

Given in all but ^10. 
It was moved . . . Recusants are there. 

Given in all but Xll; ^10. 
Sir John Stanhope ... to say mass. . 

Given in all but ^PIO. 



APPENDIX 289 

WEDNESDAY THE 18th OF FEBRUARY 
A public Fast ... by Mr. Fitz-Jeoffery. 

THURSDAY THE 19th OF FEBRUARY 

Given in all but ^^^12. 

Given just before Sir Thomas Hobby reported from . . . in his hand in ^^^4,5, 

Qiv&n ]\is,t heioxe The House sent . . . effect as followeth in ■^10. 
The customers did appear ... of the House. 

Given only in Xl-10,13,15; ^10. 
Mr. RoUes . . . taken away. 

Given only in X; ^10. 
Mr. Dawes, a customer, . . . privilege of Parliament. 

As in text in X; ^10. 

As in note in ^1-9,11; T; <S>. 
Sir Humphrey May . . . privileges never held. 
Sir Peter Heyman . . . the Kings revenue. 

These two speeches given here only in X; *10. 

Given on Feb. 20, just before Mr. Selden conceiveth . . . delivered the goods, in 
*1-6,12. 
Mr. Dawes was called . . . violated the same. 

As in text in X; ^10. 

As in note in ^1-9,11; T; <l>. 
Mr. Carmarthen was called in ... I could not. 

As in text in X; ^10, 

As in note in \[' 1-9,11; T\ *. 

These last two paragraphs given on Feb, 20, just before Mr. Selden conceiveth 
. . . deliver the goods, in XI 1. 
Sir John Eliot. I rise . . . they shall merit. 

Given only in X; ^10. 

Given just after Sir John Eliot. The heart-blood . . . of this House, in Xll. 
Mr. Wandesford moved . . . were easily determined. 

Given in all but XI 1,15; ^10. 
Mr. Selden. If there ... to sit here. 

Given in all but ^10. 

Given just before Mr. Wansford moved . . . determined in X. 
Sir Nathaniel Rich ... a Parliament man. 

Given in all but 'i'lO. 
Sir John Eliot. The heart-blood ... of this House. 

Given in all but ^10. 
It is resolved ... of debate. 

Given in all but Xll; ^10. 
Mr. Herbert in the Chair of this Committee. 

Given in all but X5, 7, 11, 15; ^10. 

FRIDAY THE 20th OF FEBRUARY 
Given just before The customers did appear . . . of the House in ^10. 
Given just before Mr. Herbert in the Chair of this Committee in XI, 2, 4-6,8, 10,13, 15; 

^1,2,4-6,8-10,12. 
The proceedings for Feb. 20, and 21, omitted from ^10. 



290 APPENDIX 

A petition of complaint . . . Coiirts of Justice. 

Given in all but X8. 
Sir John Wolstenholme . . . granted the same. 

Given just aiter The lease made . . . was also read in Xl-lO,13,15. 

Given on Feb. 19, just before Mr. Dawes was called . . . violated the same in XI 1. 
At a Committee . . . about the Customs 

Given only in Xl-10,13; ^3,6. 
Whereupon the warrant . . . in hac verba. 
Carolus Dei . . . Act of ParHament. 

These two paragraphs given only in xl-10,13; '^1-6, 12; r6,7. 

Given on Feb. 21, just after Hereupon the Commission . . . only to levy in r5-7. 
The lease made . . . was also read. 

Given only in Xl-10,13. 
Mr. Selden conceiveth . . . delivered the goods. 

Given on Feb. 19, just after Mr. Carmarthen called in ... I could not in XI 1. 
It was ordered . . . King or not. 

Given in all but XI 1. 
Mr. Glanvile ... in the goods. 

SATURDAY THE 21st OF FEBRUARY 

Given just before At the Committee about the customers . . . Mr. Rolles his 
goods in ■^'10. 

Given just heiore Sir John Wolstenholme . . . granted the same in Xll. 

Given just before Sir Robert Pye saith . . . two months since in ^3. 
A petition was preferred . . . Committee for Merchants. 

Given in all but X6,9,ll,15. 
Sir Robert Pye saith . . , two months since. 

Given in all but X6,9, 11,15. 

At the Committee for Merchants 

Given in all but Xl-4,6-10,13,15. 
Mr. Littleton. Before we go . . . purpose were made. 

As in text in Xl-10,13. 

As in note in Xll, 15; ^; T; *. 
Sir Robert Phelips. Thus you . . . time of privilege. 

Omitted from Xll. 
Sir Humphrey May. That ... of his duty. 

Omitted from XI 1,1 5. 

Given in appendix in X9. 
Sir Francis Seymour. I desire . . . every project. 
Mr. Glanvile. Here is ... of the Crown. 

Omitted from X6, 11,15. 
Secretary Coke . . . now in question. 

Omitted from XI 1,15; ^3. 
Sir John Strangeways. I know ... is easily determined 
Mr. Banks . . . 
Mr. Solicitor . . . 
Mr. Selden . . . 



APPENDIX 291 

Sir Nathaniel Rich . . . 

Decided by question ... in his goods. 

Given in all but Xl-8; r3,4,ll. 
Mr. Noy . . . 
Secretary Coke . . . 
Whereupon the commission . . . only to levy. 

Given in all but XL 
Sir Humphrey May . . . 
Sir Nathaniel Rich . . . 
Sir Humphrey May again desireth ... to the question. 

Given in all but X5. 
Mr. Kirton . . . 
Mr. Glanvile . . . 
The Privy Counsellors . . . 
The warrants . . . 
Mr, Kirton ... 
Sir Humphrey May . . . 
Secretary Coke saith as much. 

Given in all but XI, 2. 
Mr. Hackwill . . . time of prorogation. 
Mr. Noy saith . . . adjudged the privilege. 
Mr. Hackwill saith . . . the same opinion. 

These last three speeches omitted from Xl-8; rll. 
It was decided ... all times since. 
This Committee is adjourned ... to attend them. 

Given in all but X6. 

MONDAY THE 23rd OF FEBRUARY 

Given in all but X6; *. 

Given just before Sir Humphrey May. I will never . . . restitution made, in *10. 

Given just before Secretary Coke reported . . . distinctions in X15. 

The proceedings for this day omitted from $. 

At the Committee . . . Mr. Rolles his goods. 

Given only in Xl-5,7-10,13,15; ^10. 

Given at the beginning of Feb. 20th in X15. 
Sir Robert Phelips. Let us . . . and sever them. 

Given at the beginning of Feb. 20th in X15. 
Mr. Littleton. I should ... to deter others. 

These two speeches given only in X; '4^10. 

Given after Sir John Eliot. The question . . . to procure satisfaction, in Xll. 

Littleton's speech given at the end of Feb. 19 in X15. 
Sir Humphrey May. I will never . . . restitution made. 
Sir John Eliot. The question ... to procure satisfaction. 

These two speeches follow that of Phelips in X15. 
Secretary Coke . . . 

Given on Feb. 21st following that by Selden in XI 5. 



292 APPENDIX 

Report was made ... to the House. 

Given in all but X15; ^5. 
Secretary Coke reported . . . distinctions. 
Sir Robert Phelips . . . 
Hereupon there were . . . whereof followeth. 

Given only in Xl-5, 7,8,10,13. 
Heads and Articles . . . soundness of opinion. 

Given here in Xl-5, 7,8; Til. 

Given aiter Hereupon the House . . . Wednesday following in X9,10. 

Given after Upon Wednesday . . . morning next following in -ir 1,3, 12. 

Given on Feb. 3, following Pym's speech (Jan. 27) in *5. 

Given on Feb. 13, in *6,7,11. 

Dated Feb. 14, in r2. 
Hereupon the House . . . Wednesday following. 

WEDNESDAY THE 25th OF FEBRUARY 
Upon Wednesday . . . morning next following. 
Given in all but X15; ^12; *3,5. 

THE PROTESTATIONS ... 2 MARCH 1628 
Given in all but ^1,8-10,12. 
Given at the end of Feb. 23, in Xl-8; ril. 
Combined with The Agitation in X9,10; ^2,5,6,11. 

SIR JOHN ELIOT AND MR. SELDEN, MONDAY 2d MARCH 
Given in all but 'i'4,5; *. 
Given at the end of Feb. 23rd in r5,6. 
Dated March 1st in *8- 11. 
Combined with The Agitation in Xl-10; *1,2,12; ril. 

THE AGITATION ... 2 OF MARCH 1628 
Given only in Xl-10; *1, 2,4-6,8-12; ril. 

Independent combinations of the different accounts: (a) Xl-8; Til; (b) X9,10; 
(c) *1,12; (d) ^2. 






INDEX 



INDEX 

References in the index are only to the source material, that is to the text and quotations in 
the notes; there areno references to the introduction or to explanatory notes. References to the same 
statement in the different accounts are separated from each other by commas. Different statements 
on the same subject are separated by semicolons. 



Acton, sheriff of London, called before the 
House for contempt, 52-53, 133-34, 181-82; 
135: 56-57, 136-37, 187-89; 60, 195; 167, 
235 

Adjournment of the House of Commons, see 
Procedure. 

Alablaster, Dr., accused of preaching popery, 
59, 139, 192-93, 249 

Alford, Edward, M.P., 136, 187 

Alleyne, Henry, examined for contempt of Par- 
liament, 118n; 129; 48-49, 132, 178-79 

Allison, clerk under Sir Robert Heath, 139, 
192 

Alured, Thomas, M.P., 192 

Andrewes, Lancelot, bishop of Winchester, 191 

Appeale to Caesar, 15; 125; 140, 193; 99 

Arniinianism, increase of 12-13, 109, 246; 15; 
16; 116; doctrine of church defined as 
opposed to, 119-20; charges against those 
who preach, 34-35, 122; records in the 
Universities against, to be examined, 57, 
137; restraint of books written against, 
58-59, 138-39, 191-92, 249 

Arundel, Earl of, 88, 161 



Babell no Bet hell, 191 

Baggett, Sir Hervey, M.P., 115 

Bakehouse, Sir John, M.P., 139 

Balamquall, Walter, Dean of Rochester, 138 

Baldwin, Bartholomew, solicited the pardon for 

Manwaring, 43, 130, 174: 192 
Ball, Peter, M.P., 128 
Banks, Father, rector of the college at Clerk- 

enwell, 208 
Banks, John, M.P., mentioned, 128; debate on 

privilege, 90, 164, 230-31 
Barrington, Sir Thomas, M.P., report on 

answer of Judge Jones, 82, 154, 218; 82 
Bateman, Chamberlain of London, 150, 212 
Baupage, John, customer, 9n 
Baytinge of the Popes Bull, 192 
Beale, John, printer, 138 
Beard, Dr., witness against the Bishop of 

Winchester, 59, 139, 192-93, 249; 140 
Beard, — , a stationer, 125 
Beecher, Sir William, INI. P., 212 



Bellasis, Henry, M.P., 240, 255 

Bellasis, Sir William, witness against Cosin, 

130; 176; 133 
Bible, bill concerning marginal notes in, 110 
Blackstone, — , witness concerning the pardons, 

139, 192 
Bland, Peter, concerned in a decree in 

Chancery, 9n 
Boldstreete, William, petition against a papist, 

151, 213 
Bowler, James, a printer, 138 
Bridges, Sir Giles, M.P., 114; 225 
Brograve, — , case in the Committee for Courts 

of Justice, 48, 177 
Browker, Thomas, private act concerning, 202 
Brown, — , estate of, 80, 150-51, 212-13 
Brown, John, of Middle Temple, 212 
Browne, — , a clergyman of Oxford, 99 
Browne, — , M.P., 201; 231 
Buckeridge, John, bishop of Ely, 100, 203 
Buckingham, Duke of, mentioned, 147; 225; 

102-3, 170, 241, 259 
Buller, Sir Richard, M.P., 206 
Bulstrode, Sir William, M.P., 129; 64, 144-45, 

204; 148, 209; 219 
Burgess, a priest, petition against, 63, 202 
Burgesse, Alexander, put in stocks for refusal 

to pay a tax, 206 
Burton, Henry, writer, 125n; 191n; 192n 
Bushell, Philip, petition against Lord Falkland 

concerning, 158, 225 
Butterfield, Robert, granted license to print, 39 



Cademan, Sir Thomas, physicllin, 155, 220 
Cambden, Lord, concerned in petition against 

Sir Henry Marten, ISO, 212 
Carey, Henry, Lord, M.P., 238 
Carleton, Dudley, Lord Dorchester, 39-40; 125; 

45, 131, 175 
Carleton, George, bishop of Chichester, 249; 

138; 100 
Carmarthen, Richard, customer, named, 9n; 

109; ordered to attend the House, 57, 137; 

148; affidavit in the Exchequer by, 201; 

message from the Lord Treasurer, etc. 



296 



INDEX 



Carmarthen, Richard (continued) 

concerning, 72; examined, 83-84, 136, 222; 
158, 224; debate concerning, 87, 158-61, 
225-26; 162, 228 

Cary, Henry, Lord Falkland a petition of com- 
plaint against, 85-86, 158, 225 

Chambers, Richard, merchant, complaint of, 
112; committee concerning complaint of, 
129; debate concerning, 136; 141, 196; 60, 
141, 196; 197; 202; 81, 217; customers 
examined concerning, 156; warrant con- 
cerning, 166 

Chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster see ^Tay, 
Sir Humphrey 

Chancery, Court of, commission out of, 115; an 
Act for reversal of a decree in, 126; mes- 
sage sent to for stay of proceedings, 62; 
199 

Charles I, speech by, 10; answer to declaration 
from H. of C, 31-32, 121; answer to peti- 
tion for a Fast, 28-29; messages to the H. 
of C. from. 111, 247; 112; 22, 112-13, 247; 
118; 120: 41, 128; 101, 169-70, 239; 103, 
170, 239, 252; messages from the H. of C. 
to. 108; 113-14; mentioned, 4, 6n; 245; 
246; 5; 7; lOn; 16; 55-56, 136, 187; 149, 
210; 78, 151, 213; 84, 155, 221; 94, 167-68, 
236-37 

Chichester, bishop of, see Carleton, George; 
Mountague, Richard 

Cholmley, Hugh, license to print, 39, 125 

Clerk of the House of Commons, 111, 247; 196; 
204 

Clerkenwell. Jesuits' College at, investigation of 
the trial of the priests and papists taken 
there, 145; 70-72, 145-46, 205-6, 249-50; 
74-78. 148-50, 207-11, 250; 78-80, 151-53, 
213-17; 217; 82-83, 153-54, 218-19; 97; 98 

Clerk's book, 246 

Coale, — , petition against, 150 

Coke, Clement, M.P., 220; 170, 242, 263 

Coke, Sir Edward, M.P., to be sent for, 58, 
138, 191; mentioned, 157, 224 

Coke, Sir John, M.P.. debate, opposed special 
committee on grievances, 6n; opposed com- 
mittee to consider proceedings against 
Rolles, 8, 9n; moved that bill of tonnage 
and poundage be read, 12, 108, 246; against 
meddling with religion, 110; objection to 
words used by Eliot, 112; explains himself 
on tonnage and poundage, 31; 33; favoring 
Sheriff Action. 53, 182; on tonnage and 
poundage, 200; 201; 91; 92; 94, 167-68; 
236-37; on Clerkenwell case, 70-71, 145, 
205, 249-50; 71, 146; 75-76, 208-9, 250; 
148, 209; 78; 150; 214; 215; 216; parlia- 
mentary privilege in case of Rolles, 90, 
164, 230: on a case of parliamentary 
privilege, 73; on petition against Sir Henry 



Coke, Sir John (continued) 

Marten, 212; objection to words of Price, 
169, 238; reports from the King, lOn 
10; 18, 111, 247; 22, 112-13, 247; 120 
31, 121; 41, 128; 71; 207; 94-95, 168, 237 
101; mentioned, 124; 63; 71; 71, 146; 210 
150; 215 
Colles, Thomas, priest in prison, 155, 220-21 
Committees, general order concerning power of, 

187 
Common Prayer, book of, alterations in, 127 
Conflicts and Comforts of Conscience, 191 
Conquest, Richard, petition against, as papist, 

151, 213 
Constable, Sir William, M.P., 82, 154, 219; 

167, 234-35; 240 
Contempt of Parliament, see Acton, Sheriff of 
London; see also, Alleyne, Henry; Lewes, 
Robert 
Convocation House, 119; 120; 127; 41, 128 
Cooper, Sir John, M. P., 133, 180 
Coquin, Charles, farmer of the customs, 159 
Corbet, Richard, bishop of Oxford, 100 
Cornill, John, sent for to attend the House for 
serving process on a member, 114 

Coryton, William, M.P., favored committee 
to consider Rolles' case, 9n; on case of 
Sheriff Acton, 188; concerning Lord Falk- 
land, 225; on duties of the Speaker, 255; 
on feeling of the members towards the 
King, 242, 261-62; on religion, 19-20; 121- 
22; 34-35; 129; 64; 70; on Clerkenwell 
case, 208; 149; on tonnage and poundage, 
22-23; 61, 142, 197; 61, 198; mentioned, 
24n; 239n 

Cosin, John, pardon granted to, 246; petition 
preferred against, 36, 124; investigation 
concerning pardon of, 37, 124; 125; 40, 
126; notice to attend the House, 41, 128; 
investigation continued, 130, 174; 43-47, 
130-31, 174-77; 132, 179-80; 52, 133, 181; 
59, 139, 192; 60, 139-40, 193; mentioned, 
100 

Cottington, Sir Francis, 115; 201 

Council, see Privy Council 

Crane, Sir Robert, M.P., 139, 193 

Crashaw, — , concerned in petition against Sir 
Henry Marten, 150, 212 

Croke, Sir George, judge in the Clerkenwell 
case, 81, 153; 82, 154, 219 

Cromwell, Oliver, M.P., 59, 139, 192-93 

Cross, Humphrey, examined in the Clerkenwell 
case, 71-72; 208n; 76, 210; ISO; 79, 152, 
215; 218; 219 

Customs, term applied to tonnage and pound- 
age, 7, 9n, 245; 10; 112; 129; 140-41, 195- 
96; 162; 231; 170; commission to levy, 86, 



INDEX 



297 



Customs (continued) 

159, 226; 91; offices of; see customers; 
farmers of, see customers ; see also fanners 

Customers, officers of the custom house, farm- 
ers (terms used interchangeably), to be 
sent for, 8, 9n; named, 9n; complained of 
for seizure of goods, 112; 115; 129; 140-41, 
195-96; ordered to attend the House, 81, 
217; examined, 83-85, 155-58, 221-24; war- 
rant from the King to, 86; grand commit- 
tee about the, 85, 158, 224; 86-87, 158-61, 
225-28; 88-93, 162-66, 228-34; 93-94, 167-68, 
234-37; mentioned, 10; 198, see also Car- 
marthen, Richard; Dawes, Abraham; Wol- 
stenholme. Sir John; and farmers 

Darcy, Sir Francis, M.P., 145-46, 205; 154, 

219; 219 
Dawes, Abraham, customer, named, 9n ; ordered 
to attend the House, 57, 137; a grant to, 
195; affidavit in the Exchequer by, 201; 
message from the Lord Treasurer, etc., 
concerning, 73; examined, 83-84, 155-56, 
221-22; 158, 224; debate concerning, 87, 
158-61, 225-26; 162, 228; 91, 166; 233; 166; 
see customers 
De la Bar, John, license to export grain, 107 
Delbridge, John, M.P., 160 
Denham, John, baron of the Exchequer, 74 
Digges, Sir Dudley, M.P., debate, opposed 
special committee on grievances, 6n; on 
exportation of grain, 107; on tonnage and 
poundage, 108; 200-1; 201; on Articles of 
Religion, 122; on Acton's case, 188; on 
Clerkenwell case, 145, 205; 210; 211; 216; 
154, 219; on privilege, 157, 224; on the 
case of the customers, 227; 165, 232; 168, 
237; 238; for adjournment on March sec- 
ond, 243, 263 
Dorchester, Viscount, see Carleton, Dudley 
Dorset, Earl of, see Sackville, Edward 
Downes, Nathaniel, witness against the cus- 
tomers, 162, 228 
Duncombe, Dr. — , author, 116 
Durham, bishop of, see Howson, John 
Durham, Dean of, see Hunt, Richard 

Eaton, Dr., on election of bishops, 118n 

Edmondes, Sir Thomas, Treasurer of the Royal 
Household, M.P., debate on tonnage and 
poundage, 22, 113; 61, 198; message from 
the King, 118; effort to free the Speaker, 
March second, 104 

Election of members of the House, question 
regarding writ, 9n; case of Walter Long, 
41, 127; case of Peter Wynne, 181 

Election of a bishop, 118n, 248-49; 54-55, 135, 
184-85 



Eliot, Sir John, M.P., debate, on Petition of 
Right, 5; 6; 6n; on case of Rolles, 8; SSn, 
135-36, 186; 168, 237; 169, 238; on reli- 
gion, 24-28; 116-17; 33-34, 121; 155, 220; 
on the pardons, 45-46, 131, 175-76; 176; 
50, 132-33, 180; 52; on the Clerkenwell 
case, 77, 149, 210-11; 149; 78; 216; 219; 
concerning the merchants, 112; 60, 140-41, 
195-96; 202; 81, 217; 85. 156, 222; 159, 
226; 227; 91; 166; 233; 93-94, 167, 236; 
on tonnage and poundage, 108; 23, 113; 
32-33, 121; 60-61, 141-42, 196-97; on 
charges allowed witnesses, 128; on the case 
of Sheriff Acton, 52-53, 133-34, 181; 182; 
on case of Lord Lambert, 206; on privilege, 
85, 157, 223; 157-58, 224; debate on 
March second, 104, 240, 252-54; 240, 256; 
240, 256-57; 170, 241, 258; 102-3, 104, 

170, 241-42, 258-61; 171, 242; 171, 265; 

171, 265; 266; 267 

Ely, bishop of, see Buckeridge, John; Felton, 
Nicholas 

Erie, Sir Walter, M.P., debate on religion, 
18-19; the pardons, 35; 60, 194; on Clerk- 
enwell case, 211; on bill for tonnage and 
poundage, 47, 177; March second, 254; 257 

Essence and attributes of God, 99 

Exchequer Court, order in, for staying mer- 
chants' goods, 5, 6n; 7; 60-63, 141-44, 195- 
201; message from the House to, 63, 144, 
203; answer from, 73-74, 147, 207; 81, 217; 
warrant from the King to, 86, 159; 226-27; 
case of the merchants in, 90, 164; 90-91, 
165, 232. 

Exports; price at which grain could be exported, 
107; bill against, 225 



Falkland, Lord, see Cary, Henry 

Fanshaw, Sir Thomas, 216 

Farmers of the customs, commission to, 143; 
distinction between officers and, 156, 222; 
159, 227; 160-61; 162; 164; 165, 232; 
ordered to attend the House, 57; see also 
customers for less definite use of the term 

Fast, motion for, 16, 109-10, 247; petition for, 
17; conference with the Lords concerning, 
18; King's answer to petition for, 28-29; 
preachers for, 41, 128; 42, 129; notice to 
be given about, 63; proclamation about, 
207; not seasonable to dispute because of, 
217; observed Feb. 18, 83 

Fawkes, — , a merchant, petition of, 129; peti- 
tion delivered, 60. 141, 196; motion of 
Eliot concerning, 202 

Felton, Nicholas, bishop of Ely, 139 

Finch, Sir Heneage, Recorder, concerned in 
Clerkenwell case, 75, 148. 207; 77, 149, 
211; 78, 151, 213; 214; 217 



298 



INDEX 



Finch, Sir John, Speaker of the House, debate 
in committee, 211; 220; 224; messages from 
the King to adjourn, by, 169, 239; 103, 
169-70, 239, 252-53; held in his Chair, 104, 
240, 253; protests of, 240-41; 252-58; de- 
bate concerning duty of, 103, 104-5, 171- 
72, 243, 264-65 

Fitz-Jeoffery, William, preacher at the Fast, 42, 
129; 83 

Fleetwood, Sir Miles, M.P., debate on religion 
114; on the pardons, 60, 140, 193-94; on 
case of Sheriff Acton, 189; on the Clerk- 
enwell case, 216; 82, 154, 218-19; on 
Rolles' case, 235; March second, 240 

Fowch, George, patent granted to, 202 

Gadston, — , witness against Neile, 139, 193 
Gag for an old Goose, A New, 140, 193; 99 
Gall, — , of the signet office, 192 
Gardner, Thomas, witness against Sir Henry 

Marten, 150-51, 213 
Germy, Sir Thomas, an Act for, 190 
Giles, Sir Edward, M.P., 38-39; 257 
Gilman, a merchant, 129; 60, 141, 196; 202; 156 
Glanvile, John, M.P., debate on the bill of 
tonnage and poundage, 143, 199-200; on 
committee to draw up message to the Ex- 
chequer, 200; debate concerning Lord Falk- 
land, 225; debate on case of the merchants, 
87, 159, 227; 90, 164, 230; 92, 166, 233; 
167, 235; 169, 238 
Goad, Thomas, author, 138 
God noe Impostor nor Deluder, 191 
Godfrey, Thomas, M.P., 200; 216; 220 
Golden Spur to the Celestial Race, 58, 138, 191 
Goodwin, Robert, M.P., 53, 134, 181 
Gregg, Ed., to be sent for, 194 
Gregg, Rob., to be sent for, 194 
Grievances, Committee of, when to sit, 129; 

petitions referred to, 150; 225 
Grosvenor, Sir Richard, M.P., motion by, 194; 
report on religion, 65-69: on committees, 
212; 225 
Guinea Company, 225 

Hakewill, William, M.P., 181; 92, 233; 93 

Hamond, Edward, an Act for, 194 

Hampden, John, M.P., debate on the case of 

the merchants, 225 
Harley, Sir Robert, M.P., 108; 116; 190; 232 
Harris, Mr., preacher at the Fast, 42, 129; 83 
Harris, — , a clerk concerned in the pardons, 

192 
Harrison, John, M.P., officer under the 

farmers, 159, 227 



Hayman, Sir Peter, M.P., debate on the case 
of the merchants, 84; March second, 240, 
256, 105, 172, 243, 266 

Heale, Sir Thomas, M.P., 51-52, 133, 180 

Heath, Sir Robert, attorney-general. Petition of 
Right printed by command of, 9, 9n; re- 
proached by Eliot, 112; investigation of his 
part in granting the pardons, 38-40, 124-26; 
43-47, 130-31, 174-77; 179; 180; 52, 133, 
181; 59, 139, 192; involved in the case of 
the merchants, 55, 186; 57, 190; 141, 195- 
96; 196-97; 201; concerned in Clerkenwell 
case, 71, 145, 205, 250; 75, 148, 207; 76-78, 
149-50, 209-11, 250; 214; 78-79, 152, 214-15; 
221 

Heath, — , of Gray's Inn, concerned in the 
pardons, 126; 43-44, 130, 174; 176; 140 

Herbert, Sir Arnold, petition by, 228 

Herbert, Edward, M.P., chairman of commit- 
tee about the customers, 85, 158, 224; 158, 
225; 161; 162, 228; 167, 234; report to the 
House, 168, 237 

Herbert, Sir William, M.P., 6n 

High Commission Court, mentioned, 71; priests 
committed by, 155, 220; Dr. Wrenn made a 
member of, 100; sentences in, 126; punish- 
ment by, for printing orthodox books, 138; 
Mountague a member, 123 
Hilton, — , petition from, 212 
Hippesley, Sir John, M.P., petitioned against 
in House of Lords, 115; petitioned against, 
to be sent for, 116; opinion on his case, 
72-73, 146-47, 206-7 
Hobart, Sir Miles, M.P., 239n; 257; 266 
Hobby, Sir Thomas, M.P., on manner of pre- 
ferring a petition, 6n; charge of bill against 
popish recusants, 114; 72; attack on Moun- 
tague, 122; for Ogle's petition, 124; on the 
pardons, 203; on the Clerkenwell case, 
74-75, 148, 207; 148; 209-10; 216; 82, 153, 
218; investigation concerning recusants, 
72; 234 
Holland, Earl of, see Rich, Henry 
Holies, Denzil, M.P., debate on case of the 
merchants, 236; holds the Speaker in his 
Chair, 104, 240, 253; debate on duty of 
the Speaker, 240, 256; speaks to Eliot's 
declaration, 171, 243, 265-66; puts it to the 
question, 105, 172, 243, 266-67 
Hopton, Sir Ralph, M.P., 189; 220 
Hoskins, John, M.P., 120; 211; 220 
Hotham, Sir John, M.P., 205 
Howson, John, bishop of Durham, 100 
Hunt, Richard, dean of Durham, 44, 130, 133 
Hyde, Sir Nicholas, judge in the Clerkenwell 
case, 75, 148, 207; 78; 151, 213; 151, 
214; 79, 152, 215; 81, 153; 82, 153, 218 



INDEX 



299 



Imposition upon malt, 40-41, 126 
Invocation to Saints, 193 



Jackson, — , author, 99 

Jacob, Abram, farmer of the customs, 159 

Jephson, Sir John, M.P., 193 

Jermyn, Sir Thomas, M.P., an Act for, 190; 

debate on case of the merchants, 236; 

March second, 243, 266 
Jones, Charles, M.P., 236 
Jones, Sir William, judge in the Clerkenwell 

case, 81, 153; 82, 154, 218 
Jones, William, printer, petition against Moun- 

tague, 118n, 248; to be heard by counsel, 

123; 36, 123; 43 
Jordan, — , who presented a bill concerning 

marginal notes in the Bible, 110 
Justice, Committee for Courts of, 80, 150, 151, 

212, 213; 86, 225; report from, 48, 177 

Keeper, Lord, 40, 126 

King, Thomas, witness against Cosin, 45, 130- 
31, 175; 131, 176; 133 

Kirton, Edward, M.P., debate on religion, 
14-15; 34; on tonnage and poundage, 113 
47, 132, 177; 137-38; 197; on the pardons, 
37; 59-60, 193; on case of Sheriff Acton 
57, 188; comment on answer from the Ex- 
chequer, 74; on the case of the merchants 
222; 227; 92; moved that the House 
might be called, 234; March second, 254 

Lambe, Dr. John, 203 

Lambe, John, witness against Mountague, 139 

Lambert, Lord, M.P., complaint against, 72, 
206; 212 

Latham, — , who took the house at Clerkenwell, 
146; 152, 215 

Laud, William, bishop of London, 35, 122; 39, 
125; 58, 138, 191; 100 

Lawton, — , witness on the pardons, 192 

Levant Company, 115; 233 

Lewis his Legacy, 191 

Lewis, Robert, a petition against for contempt, 
16-17, 110 

Lincoln, Bishop of, see Williams, John 

Lindsey, Dr. Dean of Lichfield, 140, 194 

Littleton, Edward, M.P., debate, for committee 
on grievances, 6n; on case of Rolles, 8, 
9n; on power of Convocation, 120; on the 
pardons, 176; 47, 131, 177; on Sheriff 
Acton's case, 57, 189; for sending a mes- 
sage to the Exchequer, 62, 143, 200; on 
Clerkenwell case, 205; point of law on 



Littleton, Edward (continued) 

privilege for goods, 88-89, 162-63, 228-29; 
on merchants' case, 93, 235; March second, 
171, 242-43, 263-64 
Littleton, Sir Edward, deposition out of Chan- 
cery, 115 
London, Bishop of, see Laud, William 
Long, — , Justice of the Peace, witness in the 
Clerkenwell case, 205; 206; 71, 146; 76-78, 
149-50, 209-11, 250; 79-80, 152-53, 214-16; 
82-83, 153-54, 218-19 
Long, Walter, M.P., debate, on bill for ton- 
nage and poundage, 22; his election, 41, 
127; on Sheriff Acton's case, 182; 56, 188; 
on number of papists, 205; on case of the 
merchants, 223; motion on attendance in 
House, 234; March second, 171, 243, 264 
Lords, reference to House of, 24; 115; 116; 
72-73, 146-47, 206-7; 90, 165; 91, 165, 232; 
conference with, 18, 110; 43 
Lownes, — , a stationer, 125 
Lownes, Laurence, a bill for, 9n; 228 
Lyveley, Edward, M.P., 50, 132, 179 



Mansell, Sir Robert, M. P., 188 

Mansell, Thomas, petition by, 212 

Manwaring, Roger, debate concerning the par- 
don of, 246; 118n; 37, 124; 40; 43, 130, 
174; 50, 179; 59, 139, 192; 68 

Marshall, Dr., witness against Neile, 59, 139, 
193, 249; 140 

Marshall, Sir George, case in Court of Chan- 
cery, 199 

Marten, Sir Henry, M.P., debate on election 
of bishops, 118n, 248-49; 54, 134, 184; 54- 
55, 135, 184-85; on Clerkenwell case, 149, 
211; 78, 151, 213; complaint against for 
disposing of goods of one Brown, 80, 150- 
51, 212-13 

Mason, Robert, M.P., 115 

Maxwell, — , usher in the House, 106, 172, 243, 
267 

May, Sir Humphrey, Chancellor of the duchy 
of Lancaster, M.P., objects to Eliot's 
attack on ministers, 33; defends the King, 
35, 122; debate on the pardons, 128; 176; 
51, 180; on case of Sheriff Acton, 53, 182; 
189; on Rolles' case, 55-56, 136, 187; 84, 
155, 221; on message to the Exchequer, 
61, 197-98; 201; 63, 144, 203; 73, 207; 
permission to be absent from House, 190; 
on case of Sir John Hippesley, 72; on 
Clerkenwell case, 151, 214; 218; 154; 
whether debate on privilege should have 
precedent, 157, 224; 157-58; 158, 224; 
whether case of privilege involves the 
King, 89, 163, 230; 165-66; 89, 163, 230; 



300 



INDEX 



May, Sir Humphrey (continued) 

91, 166; 92, 166, 233; 92, 166; 93, 167, 
235; 169, 238; on division into country 
and court parties, 236; effort to free the 
Speaker, March second, 104 

Maynard, Sir John, M.P., 188-89; 204 

Mease, — , officer of the customs, 9n 

Merchants, complaint for seizure of goods by 
customers, 10; 81, 217; debate concerning, 
60-63, 141-44, 196-200; 81, 217-18; 85, 155- 
58, 221-24; privilege granted to, 63, 202; 
message from the Exchequer concerning, 
73-74, 147, 207; select committee for, 56; 
190; report from committee to the House, 
52, 181; 60, 140-41, 195-96; examination of 
the customers concerning, 83-84, 155-56, 
221-22 

Michell, John, petition of, 115 

Middlemore, Mr., solicitor, in the Clerkenwell 
case, 71; 146; 216 

Mildmay, Sir Henry, M.P., 176; 188 

Moore, Dr., witness against Neile, 50-52, 133, 
180; 63-64, 144, 203-4; 148, 207, 249 

Moore, Edward, a priest taken at Clerkenwell, 
148, 207; 78, 151, 213; 152; 217 

iJlosley, Sir Edward, attorney of the Duchy 
Court, petition against, 48, 132, 177; 225 

Mosley, Thomas, petition against, 177 

Moulson, Thomas, M.P., 53 

Mountague, Richard, bishop of Chichester, par- 
don granted to, 246; complaint against, 
117; 35, 122-23; proclamation against, 34; 
investigation concerning pardon of, 37, 124; 
39-40, 125; 43, 130, 174; 45, 175; 49-50, 
132; 59, 139, 192; petition against his con- 
firmation, 118n; 248; investigation as to 
legality of his confirmation, 36, 123; 53, 
134, 182; Appeale licenced, 125; 99; 
charges brought against, 60, 140, 193-94; 
66; 68; recommendation against, 100 



Neile, Richard, bishop of Winchester, concerned 
in granting the pardons, 39-40, 125-26; 
44-45, 130, 175; 45, 131, 175; 46, 131, 175- 
76; 50, 132, 179; 180; 59, 139, 192; 214; 
charges brought against, 50-52, 132-33, 180; 
59, 139, 192-93, 249; 63-64, 144, 203; 148, 
207, 249; 100; 102, 104, 241, 259 
Newburgh, Edward Barrett, Lord, Chancellor 

of the Exchequer, 74 
Nicholls, Archibald, complaint of, in House of 
Lords against a member of the House of 
Commons, 116 
Noell (Nowell), — , petition by, 177; 225 
Norton, — , the King's printer, 5-6, 6n 
Norton, Sir Daniel, M.P., 50-51, 133, 180 
Norwich, bishop of, see White, Francis 



Noye, Williams, M.P., allowed to plead a case 
in H. of L.; debate in investigation of the 
pardons, 176; debate on bill for tonnage 
and poundage, 62, 142-43, 199; on the case 
of the merchants, 143-44, 200; 159-60, 227; 
on committee to draw up message to the 
Exchequer, 200 ; whether case of privilege 
involves the King, 91, 166, 232; 92-93, 
233-34 



Ogle, Thomas, petition against Cosin, 36, 124; 

confirms his petition before committee, 41, 

128; mentioned, 181 
Oxford, bishop of, see Corbet, Richard 
Oxwicker, Robert, merchant to Spain, 107; 115 



Pace, Adrian, merchant to Spain, 107; 115 

Packer, John, M.P., 234 

Palmer, Richard, priest in prison, 155, 220 

Papists, increase in the number of, 14, 109, 
246; 64, 144-45, 204; 69-70, 204-5; pro- 
ceedings against, stopped, 14, 109; petition 
against a, 128; 42, 129; report on the pro- 
ceedings against, the last Session, 65-69; 
see also Recusants; and Clerkenwell, Col- 
lege at 

Pardons granted by the King; subcommittee 
of religion to view, 35, 122-23; to inquire 
who were the procurers of, 38, 124; sent 
to Mr. Attorney, 124, see Cosin, Man- 
waring, Mountague, Sibthorpe. 

Parre, — , a priest taken at Clerkenwell, 152 

Parties, Country and Court, 236 

Payne, — , witness against Neile, 139 

Pelham, Henry, M.P.. 109 

Perriman, — , called to the bar for contempt, 
217 

Perrott, Sir James, M.P., 35, 122; 39, 125; 236 

Petition of Right, committee to see how en- 
rolled, 4, 6n, 245; to see how infringed, 
4, 6n, 245; 5; how printed, 5-6; 8-9, 9n; 
committee concerning, to meet, 112; men- 
tioned, 198 

Phelips, Sir Robert, M.P., speech on griev 
ances, 7-8; for a committee on grievances, 
9n; debate on bill for tonnage and pound 
age, 109; 62, 142, 198-99; on Rolles' case, 
55, 186; 93, 167, 234; 235; on the mer 
chants' case, 129; 217; 93, 167, 234; mes 
sage to the Exchequer, 201; 147; whether 
case of privilege involved the King, 89, 
163, 230; 165; 95, 168-69, 238; proposal for 
a Fast, 16, 109-10, 247; investigation of 
the pardons, 37-38; 124; 39-40, 125-26; 174; 
43-45, 130-31, 174-75; 180; on Mountague's 
confirmation, 184; charges against Neile, 
51, 133, 180; 59, 193; on increase of pa- 



INDEX 



301 



Phelips, Sir Robert (continued) 

pists, 69-70, 145, 204; on Clerkenwell case, 
208; 213; 151, 214; 216; 219; 220; motion 
on behalf of Lord Purcy, 42, 128; debate 
on Alleyne's case, 49, 132, 178-79; on 
Sheriff Acton's case, 189; on Sir John 
Hippesley's case, 147, 206; charges against 
the Lord Treasurer, 171, 243, 265 

Pindar, Sir Pal., farmer of the customs, 159; 
161; 195 

Pope, Sir William, case in the Court of Chan- 
cery, 199 

Potts, Spencer (Spedman), merchant, 162, 228 

Predian, John, petition of, 118n 

Price, Charles, M.P., 6n; 190; 169, 238 

Price, Sir E — , M.P., 189 

Price, Theodore, principal of Hart Hall, 144, 
204 

Printers, petition of booksellers and, 58, 138- 
39, 191-92 

Privilege of Parliament, violation of, by the 
King, 247; resolved that merchants busi- 
ness concerns, 141; 143; when a member 
should have privilege for his goods, 88-89, 
162-63, 228-29; granted persons having com- 
plaints pending in the House, 63, 202; for 
particular cases see Baggett, Sir Hervey; 
Bridges, Sir Giles; Hippesley, Sir John; 
Rolles, John; Speccot, Paul; for violations 
of, see Contempt of Parliament. 

Privy Council, activities of, 70-71, 145, 205; 
249-50; 76; 77, 211; 78; 152, 215; 154, 
219; 155; 84, 155, 221; 86; 92; 94, 168, 
237; 100; 104; complaint against, 112; 
55-56, 136, 187; 197; 143; 149; 81, 217; 
239n; members in the House used as a 
means of communicating with the King, 
12, 108; 22; 75, 148, 207; 171 

Procedure, whether bill of subsidy could be 
introduced from the King, 108; no member 
to be absent without leave, 58, 138, 190; 
form of communication between the House 
and Court of Chancery. 143, 199; order for 
call of the House, 234; whether a member 
of the House ought to be judged upon com- 
plaint in H. of L., 72-73, 146-47, 206-7; 
whether witnesses be allowed charges, 42; 
128; whether affirmation of a member 
needs further proof, 162; members of the 
House allowed to plead in the H. of L., 
128; manner of presenting a petition, 6n; 
whether privilege should have precedence, 
156-58, 223-24; King's message not to be 
delivered to a committee, 237; adjourn- 
ment, 103-4, 170, 239, 252-56 

Protestations of the Commons, 101-2, 172, 
243-44, 267 

Purcy, Lord, petition in behalf of, 42, 128 



Puritan, considered a term of reproach, 16; 
110; 48-49, 132, 178-79; party term, 63, 
202 

Pye, Sir Robert, M.P., member of subcommit- 
tee to examine the pardons, 124; sent to 
the Attorney, 211; debate on complaint 
against customers, 88, 161; on procedure, 
237; March second, 171, 264 

Pym, John, M.P., motion to defer debate on 
opening day, 4-5; programme for com- 
mittee on religion set forth, 20-21, 111-12; 
in the Chair for committee on religion, 
119; 121; 128; 130; 132; 179; 138, 191; 
64, 144, 204; 148, 207; 213; 218; report 
on proceedings against Mountague, 123; 
39; on Ogle's petition against Cosin, 128; 
on information concerning Dr. Moore, 
133, 180; urged witness to give testimony 
at committee of religion, 214; debate on 
Sheriff Acton's case, 49; on charges against 
Mountague, 194; whether privilege should 
have precedence, 156-57, 222-23; on the 
case of the merchants, 160; motiorj to 
renew charges against Burgess, 202; mo- 
tion regarding Lord Lambert, 206; motion 
to have lease read, 227; an Act committed 
to, 234 



Radcliffe, — , ordered to attend the House, 202 

Rates, book of, 201; 73 

Recorder, see Finch, Sir Heneage. 

Recusants, commission for compounding with, 
212; stay of proceedings against, 83, 154- 
55, 220-21; 161-62, 228; 234; 98 

Reeves, Dr. Thomas, counsel for Jones, 123; 
36, 123 

Religion, Articles of, the thirty-nine, 20; 116; 
23, 117-18; 119; 126-27; 128; Lambeth, 
20; 116; 117; 119; 119-20; 33, 121; 121-22; 
Ireland, 20; 119; 120; debate on the 
grievances concerning, 246; 12-16, 109-10, 
246; 24-28, 116-17; on whether religion 
should be given precedence, and heads to 
be debated, 18-21, 111-12, 246-47; King's 
message concerning, 22, 112-13, 247; an- 
swer to King's message, 113-14; 29-30; 
Commons resolutions on, 23, 117-18; doc- 
trine defined, 119-20; 33-34, 121-22; Heads 
and Articles concerning, 95-101; declara- 
tion of the King concerning, 20; 64; Prot- 
estations of the Commons concerning, 
101-2; committee of, resolutions of the 
House concerning, 21, 112; 130, 174; meet- 
ings of, 23, 116; 119; 33, 121; 130, 174; 
132, 179; 58, 138, 191; 64, 144, 204; 74. 
148, 207; reports from, 18, 111, 246-47; 
subcommittees for the pardons, see par- 
dons; for the printer's petition, 59, 139, 
192; see also Arminianism, Clerkenwell, 



302 



INDEX 



Religion (continued) 

College at, Fast, Pardons, Papists, Reca- 
sants, Cosin, Laud, Manwaring, Mountague, 
Neile, Sibthorpe 

Remonstrance of 1628, 18, 111, 246-47; 34-35, 
122 

Rich, Henry, Earl of Holland, 115 

Rich, Sir i^athaniel, M.P., debate, for a com- 
mittee on grievances, 6n; tenders a peti- 
tion for the Fast, 17; on heads for an 
answer to the King, 113; on church doc- 
trine, 119; on Mountague's case, 43; on 
Neile's case, 50, 180; motion for a report 
on religion, 194; debate on the merchants' 
case, 202; on the Clerkenwell case, 75; 210; 
78,149; 153,216; 82,219; on RoUes' case, 
85, 157, 223; 91, 165, 232; 91, 166, 232; 235; 
March second, 172, 244, 267; on com- 
mittee sent to the Attorney, 124; named 
to take message to the Exchequer, 201 

Richardson, — , testimony against Cosin, 114; 
131; 140 

Richardson, John, clerk of a commission for 
compounding with recusants, 212 

Richardson, Sir Thomas, one of the judges in 
the Clerkenwell case, 78, 150; 79-80, 152-53, 
216; 216; 81, 153; 82, 153-54, 218 

Rickard, Peter, merchant to Spain, 107 

Riddell, Sir Peter, M.P., 212 

Rogers, — , customer, 9n 

Rolles, John, M.P., case of privilege for his 
goods seized by the customers, informed 
the House of seizure, 7-8, 9n; case to be 
considered by committee for the merchants 
129; further complaint, 55, 186; to be in 
vestigated, 135-36, 187; 190; resolutions con 
cerning, 136; 137, 190; report concerning 
140-41, 195-96; message to the Exchequei 
concerning, 201; to be free from attach 
ment for not appearing in Star Chamber, 
202; customers examined concerning, 83- 
84, 155-56, 221-22; debated in committee 
158-61, 225-28; 88-93, 162-66, 228-34; 93-94, 
167-68, 234-37; report from the committee 
94, 168, 237; resolution concerning, 94 
168, 237 

Roper, — , sent with warrant from the Attor- 
ney, 190 

Rouse, Francis, M.P., debate on religion, 12- 
14, 109; 121; on the pardons, 37; on 
Rolles' case, 235 

Rudyerd, Benjamin, M.P., debate on whether 
to have a committee on grievances, 9n; 
on church doctrine, 116; on Rolles' case, 
167, 235; motion to examine records 
.against Arminianism in the universities, 
57, 137 



Sackville, Sir Edward, Earl of Dorset, con- 
cerned in granting the pardons, 39-40, 
125; concerned in freeing priests taken at 
Clerkenwell, 75, 148, 207; 148, 207-8; 148, 
209; 149; 77, 149, 211; M.P., in 18 
James, 199 
Sackvill, Sir John, sent with warrant from 

Earl of Dorset, 148 
St. John, John, priest in prison, 155, 220 
Salisbury, Bishop of, 138 
Sarfield, Lord, petition against, 225 
Saunders, John, M.P., 227 
Scroope, Ferris, petition against, 135 
Searle, Christ., suit of, in Chancery, 126 
Searle, Sam., suit against, in Chancery, 126 

Selden, John, M.P., debate, on violation of 
Petition of Right, 5; on Rolles' case, 9n; 
56, 136, 187; 85, 157, 223; 87, 158-59, 226; 
227; on bill of tonnage and poundage, 
108; on Articles of Religion, 117; 119-20; 
on election of a bishop, 118n; 36; on 
Sheriff Acton's case, 56-57, 136-37, 188; 
on licensing of books, 58-59; on the mer- 
chants' case, 141, 196; 62, 143, 199; 202; 
74, 147, 207; 217-18; on the Clerkenwell 
case, 70, 145, 205; 148-49, 210; 78; 79-80, 
152-53, 215-16; 154, 219; on Sir John 
Hippesley's case, 72, 146-47; on petition 
against Lord Falkland, 225; whether Rolles' 
privilege involves the King, 90-91, 165, 
231-32; 169, 238; March second, 103, 104- 
5, 171, 243, 264-65; on committee to see 
enrolling of Petition of Right, 4; to see 
Attorney Heath, 124; to form a message to 
the Exchequer; to prepare Clerkenwell 
case, 216; to examine the lease, 160, 227; 
reports from special committees. Petition of 
Right, 4; 8-9, 9n; Attorney Heath, 174; 45, 

131, 175; 47, 131n, 177; examination of 
Alleyn, 48-49, 132, 178-79; pardons, 49-50, 

132, 179; process of the merchants, 57, 137, 
190 

Seymour, Sir Francis, M.P., debate on re- 
ligion, 14, 109; on answer to the King, 
113; on the pardons, 176; on increase of 
papists, 220; on Sir John Hippesley's case, 
115; on Mountague, 122; on Sheriff Ac- 
ton's case, 56, 188; on the Clerkenwell 
case, 148, 207; 76, 149, 210; 211; 78-79, 
152, 214-15; whether Rolles' privilege in- 
volves the King, 157; 89, 164, 230; March 
second, 240, 256, 172, 244 

Sheldon, Sir Richard, Solicitor, M.P., debate 
on election of a bishop, 123; on message 
to the Exchequer, 143, 199; case of the 
merchants, 223; whether Rolles' privilege 
involves the King, 90, 164, 231 



INDEX 



303 



Sherfield (Shervile), Henry, M.P., report from 
the committee about the pardons, 37, 124; 
43, 130, 174; 49, 132; 59, 139, 192; chair- 
man of committee on tonnage and pound- 
age, 48, 177; 60, 141, 196 
Sherland, Christopher, M.P., debate on relig- 
ion, 15; 110; 117; 193; chairman of com- 
mittee for examination of Alleyne, 129 
Shipping, to Spain, 12, 107, 246; 23, 115; 118 
Shrewsbury, Lord of, house in Clerkenwell 

hired for, 71 
Shrimpton, Nicholas, messenger from Star 

Chamber, 56, 136, 187; 148 
Sibthorpe, Robert, pardon of, 246; 37, 124; 

40; 130, 174; 59, 139, 192 
Skull, Parson, procurer of pardon for Moun- 
tague, 43, 130, 174 

Spain, trading with, 12, 107, 246; ships bound 
for, 115; stay of ships bound for, 118 

Sparke, Michael, printer, 138; 191n 

Speaker of the House of Commons, see Finch, 
Sir John 

Speccot (Speckat), Paul, M.P., case of priv- 
ilege, 217 

Spencer, Richard, M.P., 107; 117 

Stanhope, Sir John, M.P., debate on the 
pardons, 50, 132, 179; on the case of 
Sheriff Acton, 189; for Sir Thomas Ed- 
monds to explain his words, 198; on 
Clerkenwell case, 151, 214; moved to give 
in names of recusants, 83 

Star Chamber, sentence in, 5; Long's prosecu- 
tion in, 41, 127; merchants served with a 
subpoena from, 55, 186; 136; 56, 187; 
137, 190; 138; 60, 141, 196; 142, 198; 62, 
142; 202; declaration in, concerning con- 
demned priests, 81, 151, 214; complaint in, 
225; decree against printing, 58 

Steward, — , M.P., 177 

Steward, (Stuart), Dr., counsel for Jones, 36, 
123; 53-54, 134, 182-83; 54, 135, 184; 135 

Steward, Sir Simeon, M.P., 223 

Strangeways, Sir John, M.P., 90, 164 

Strode, William, M.P., debate on bill for ton- 
nage and poundage, 61, 197; on Sir John 
Hippesley's case, 147; on Clerkenwell case, 
80, 214; on Rolles' case, 236; March sec- 
ond, 105n; 240, 256; 241, 258 

Stuart, see Steward 

Suffolk, Earl of, bequests to, 225 

Summer, Islands, 126; 55, 186 

Sutton, Thomas, an Act concerning will of, 225 

Symons, Thomas, petition by, 87-88, 161, 228 



Talbot, Dr., counsel for Jones, 36, 123; 134, 
182, 183-84 



Thelwall, Sir Eubule, M.P., 124; 199; 234; 
debate on the pardons, 36-37; on sending a 
message to the Exchequer, 199; on Act 
to prevent corruption in presentations, 234; 
member of subcommittee for pardons, 124 

Tickler, Mr., a preacher against loans, 133 

Tonnage and poundage, seizure of goods for 
refusal to pay, 7-8, 9n, 245; King's mes- 
sage concerning, 10; King's speech con- 
cerning, 10-11, 246; comment on King's 
speech concerning, 137; commission to col- 
lect, 140-41, 195-96; order that commission 
and proceedings concerning, be considered 
in the House, 141, 196; message to be sent 
to the Exchequer concerning, 62-63, 144, 
201; answer from the Exchequer concern- 
ing, 203, 250; 73-74, 147, 207; debate on an- 
swer from the Exchequer concerning, 74, 
147, 207; examination of the customers 
concerning the taking of, 83-84, 155-56, 
221-22; debate on testimony of customers 
concerning, 85, 156-58, 122-24; debate con- 
tinued in committee, see customers, com- 
mittee for; resolution of the Commons 
concerning, 103, 170, 241-42, 260-61; 171, 
243, 266; bill for, introduced, 12, 108-9, 
246; King's messages concerning bill for, 
18, 111, 247; 22, 112-13, 247; declaration 
to the King concerning bill for, 114; 118n; 
29-30; Coke's explanation of his words in 
introducing bill for, 31; King's answer 
to declaration concerning bill for, 31-32, 
121; committee for, ordered to meet, 47, 
132, 177; Sherfield chairman of, 48, 177; 
case of the merchants to be debated in, 
57-58, 138, 190; meeting of, 60-62, 141-44, 
196-201; see also customs 

Townsend, Robert, priest in prison, 155, 220 

Trade, Committee of, 129 

Treasurer, Lord High, see Weston, Richard 

Treasurer of the Royal Household, see Ed- 
mondes. Sir Thomas. 

Trevor, Thomas, baron of the Exchequer, 74 

Turner, Dr. Thomas, chaplain to Bishop Laud, 
39, 125; 58, 138, 191 

Twisse, William, author, 125 



Underbill, Joseph, released from Newgate 
154, 219 



Valentine, Benjamin, M.P., motion to consider 
bill of tonnage and poundage, 177; charges 
against Bishop Neile, 52, 133; debate on 
Rolles' case, 235; March second, 104, 240, 
253; 240, 256 

Vane, Sir Henry, M.P., 242 

Vaughan, — , M.P., 182 

Vernon, George, baron of the Exchequer 
203; 74 



304 



INDEX 



Walgrave, William, priest in prison, 155, 220 

Waller, Edmund or Henry, M.P., debate on 
trade with Spain, 12, 107; on religion, 
111; on the case of the merchants, 47, 
177; on Sheriff Acton's case, 53, 182; on 
licensing of books, 58, 191; charge against 
Cosin, 139-40, 193; named Dr. Gifford as 
an Arminian, 194; delivered a petition 
from the merchants, 60, 141, 196; com- 
ment on petition, 61, 198 

Walter, John, baron of the Exchequer, 74 
. Wansford, Christopher, M.P., debate on the 
pardons, 176; case of the merchants, 61, 
197; Clerkenwell case, 82, 153-54, 218; 
Rolles' case of privilege, 85, 156, 222; 
March second, 172, 243, 266 

Wardc, Samuel, author, 138 

Watkins, William, clerk of the Privy Seal, 
130, 174 

Weeden, a priest taken at Clerkenwell, 152 

Weston, Jerome, M.P., 242, 262 

Weston, Richard, Lord High Treasurer, 74; 
private warrant from, 156; Eliot's attack 
upon, 24; 102, 104, 170, 241-42, 259-60; 
defense of, by his son, 242, 262; debate 
upon charges against, 170-72, 243, 265 

Whibie, — , notice to attend the House, 202 



Whitacre, Laurence, M.P., 140; 219-20 

White, Francis, bishop of Norwich, charged 
MMt'h Arminianism, 125; 60, 194; 99; 100 

Whitelock, Sir James, judge in the Clerken- 
well case, 216; 81, 153; 82, 154, 218-19 

Wild, George, or John, M.P., 186; 226 

William, Brian, keeper of New Prison, 154, 
219 

Williams, John, Bishop of Lincoln, 115; 118n 

Winchester (Winton), bishop of, see Neile, 
Richard 

Witherington, petitioned against as a papist, 
128; 42, 129 

Wolseles, Sir R., witness in the case of the 
pardons, 192 

Wolstenholme, Sir John, customer, named, 
9n; ordered to attend the House, 57, 137; 
148; a grant to, 195; affidavit in the 
Exchequer by, 201; message from the 
Lord Treasurer, etc., concerning, 72; ex- 
amined, 86-87, 158-61, 225-28; debate con- 
cerning, 162, 228 

Wrenn, Dr., made a member of the High 
Commission Court, 100 

Wryte, Thomas, witness against Cosin, 140 

Wynne, Peter, M.P., election of, 181 



